Differentiated Science With IVR: Effects on Gifted Students’ Engagement, Self-Regulation, and Scientific Creativity
Abstract
This study explored the effects of immersive virtual reality (IVR) supported sustainability-focused differentiated science instruction on gifted students’ engagement, self-regulated learning skills, and scientific creativity. A systematically developed instructional design incorporated Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) related to Clean Water and Sanitation (SDG-6), Accessible and Clean Energy (SDG-7), Climate Action (SDG-13), Life Below Water (SDG-14), and Life on Land (SDG-15). Thirteen 3D scenes, created using Blender, were integrated into the Imedu 3D Metaverse. The embedded mixed-methods design included 40 gifted sixth graders (23 females, 17 males), divided into experimental (IVR-based) and control (non-IVR) groups. The experimental group used Oculus Quest 2 IVR headsets for a 10-week (40-lesson) intervention. Repeated measures ANOVA revealed significant group-by-time interaction effects, indicating that the IVR-supported group showed greater gains than the control group in science engagement, F(1, 38) = 5.181, η² = 0.12; self-regulated learning skills, F(1, 38) = 6.883, η² = 0.153; and scientific creativity, F(1, 38) = 68.237, η² = 0.642. Interviews, self-assessments, and student products confirmed these findings. Future research should explore larger samples and diverse SDG applications.
Plain Language Summary
How Do Immersive Virtual Reality Science Lessons Help Gifted Students Engage, Take Ownership of Their Learning, and Think More Creatively?
This study examined how immersive virtual reality (IVR) science lessons help gifted students in grade six become more engaged, self-directed, and creative learners. The lessons focused on global challenges such as clean energy, climate change, and protecting oceans and forests. Using VR headsets, students explored vivid three-dimensional environments that made these issues easier to understand. Forty gifted students were split into two groups. One group learned with IVR while the other relied on traditional classroom tools such as textbooks and videos. Although both groups covered the same topics, the IVR group showed much higher engagement, they were more curious, interested, and emotionally invested in the lessons. They also displayed stronger self-regulation skills, setting goals, managing their time and attention, and evaluating their own progress. In addition, the IVR group produced more original and practical ideas to solve real-world problems, demonstrating greater scientific creativity. Researchers confirmed these findings through interviews, classroom observations, and student products. Overall, the results suggest that well-designed IVR lessons can motivate gifted students, foster independent learning habits, and nurture creative thinking in science.
Get full access to this article
View all access and purchase options for this article.
References
Ak O., Şen Akbulut M., Soydan S., Yildirim E. (2024). Designing educational metaverses: A literature review to determine guidelines. Interactive Learning Environments. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2365956
Akhan N. E., Çiçek S., Kocaağa G. (2022). Critical and creative perspectives of gifted students on global problems: Global climate change. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 46, Article 101131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101131
Alali R., Wardat Y. (2024). Assessing the utilization level of Metaverse: Teaching mathematics at the primary level. International Journal of Distance Education Technologies, 22(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJDET.346988
Al-Duhani F., Saat R. M., Abdullah M. N. S. (2024). Effectiveness of web-based virtual laboratory on grade eight students’ self-regulated learning. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(3), Article em2410. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/14282
Al-Kfairy M., Alzaabi M., Snoh B., Almarzooqi H., Alnaqbi W. (2024, May). Metaverse-based classroom: The good and the bad. In 2024 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 1–7). IEEE.
Andonova V., Reinoso-Carvalho F., Jimenez Ramirez M. A., Carrasquilla D. (2023). Does multisensory stimulation with virtual reality (VR) and smell improve learning? An educational experience in recall and creativity. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1176697. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1176697
Araiza-Alba P., Keane T., Chen W. S., Kaufman J. (2021). Immersive virtual reality as a tool to learn problem-solving skills. Computers & Education, 164, Article 104121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104121
Arici F. (2024). Investigating the effectiveness of augmented reality technology in science education in terms of environmental literacy, self-regulation, and motivation to learn science. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2310921
Ateş H. (2024). Designing a self-regulated flipped learning approach to promote students’ science learning performance. Educational Technology & Society, 27(1), 65–83. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48754842
Ayverdi L., Asker E., Aydın S. Ö., Sarıtaş T. (2012). Determination of the relationship between elementary students’ scientific creativity and academic achievement in science and technology courses. Elementary Education Online, 11(3), 646–659.
Ayverdi L., Öz Aydın S. (2022). The effects of instructional design based on the STEM approach on the teaching process of training of gifted secondary school students. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 37(1), 254–273. https://doi.org/10.16986/HUJE.2020062717
Azevedo R. (2008). The role of self-regulation in learning about science with hypermedia. In Robinson D., Schraw G. (Eds.), Recent innovations in educational technology that facilitate student learning (pp. 127–156). Information Age.
Bagher M. M., Sajjadi P., Wallgrün J. O., La Femina P. C., Klippel A. (2021). Move the object or move the user: The role of interaction techniques on embodied learning in VR. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 2, Article 695312. https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2021.695312
Barabanschikov V. A., Selivanov V. V. (2022). In a didactic VR environment of various immersiveness. Experimental Psychology (Russia), 15(2), 4–19. https://doi.org/10.17759/exppsy.2022150201
Betts G., Kercher J. (2009). Autonomous learner. Encyclopedia of Giftedness, Creativity, and Talent, 1, 83–84.
Biswas G., Roscoe R., Jeong H., Sulcer B. (2009, December). Promoting self-regulated learning skills in agent-based learning environments. In Proceedings of the 17th international conference on computers in education (pp. 67–74). Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education.
Bonnardel N., Pichot N. (2020). Enhancing collaborative creativity with virtual dynamic personas. Applied Ergonomics, 82, Article 102949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2019.102949
Bourgeois-Bougrine S., Richard P., Burkhardt J. M., Frantz B., Lubart T. (2020). The expression of users’ creative potential in virtual and real environments: An exploratory study. In Creative learning in digital and virtual environments (pp. 96–117). Routledge.
Büyüköztürk Ş. (2014). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı istatistik, araştırma deseni, SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum [Data analysis handbook for social sciences—Statistics, research design, SPSS applications and interpretation]. Pegem Akademi.
Büyüköztürk Ş., Akgün Ö. E., Demirel F., Karadeniz Ş., Çakmak E. K. (2022). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods]. Pegem Akademi.
Byeon J. (2022). The effect of biology inquiry program using metaverse platform on the affective field of elementary science gifted student. Korean Association for Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 22(13), 641–657. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2022.22.13.641
Ceja Salgado O. (2022). Embodied learning in immersive virtual reality: The role of sensory-motor affordances in shaping conceptual and procedural understandings [Doctoral dissertation, University College London]. UCL Discovery. https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10157845/
Chandler K. L. (2012). Science curriculum for the gifted: Innovations for meeting student needs. Journal of Science Education in Japan, 36(2), 113–121. https://doi.org/10.14935/jssej.36.113
Chang Y. S., Chou C. H., Chuang M. J., Li W. H., Tsai I. F. (2023). Effects of virtual reality on creative design performance and creative experiential learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(2), 1142–1157. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1821717
Chen J., Yun Dai D., Zhou Y. (2013). Enable, enhance, and transform: How technology use can improve gifted education. Roeper Review, 35(3), 166–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2013.794892
Chen S. J., Chen C. Q., Shan X. F. (2024). The effects of an immersive virtual-reality-based 3D modeling approach on the creativity and problem-solving tendency of elementary school students. Sustainability, 16(10), Article 4092. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16104092
Chen Y., Lin W., Zheng Y., Xue T., Chen C., Chen G. (2022). Application of active learning strategies in metaverse to improve student engagement: An immersive blended pedagogy bridging patient care and scientific inquiry in pandemic. SSRN Electronic Journal. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4098179
Chen Y. L., Hsu C. C. (2020). Self-regulated mobile game-based English learning in a virtual reality environment. Computers & Education, 154, Article 103910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103910
Çiğdem H., Öncü S. (2023). Learner engagement in the metaverse: A community of inquiry for self-regulated learners. In Durak G., Cankaya S. (Eds.), Shaping the future of online learning: Education in the Metaverse (pp. 17–36). IGI Global.
Cohen J. (1973). Eta-squared and partial eta-squared in fixed factor ANOVA designs. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 33(1), 107–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447303300111
Cooper G., Thong L. P., Tang K. S. (2024). Transforming science education with virtual reality: An immersive representations model. Educational Media International, 61(3), 229–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2024.2389348
Corral C. S., Maier M. I., Argus-Calvo B. (2023). Developing imagination and creativity in a music and arts-based program. Journal of Management, Spirituality & Religion, 20(2), 143–162. https://doi.org/10.51327/mqpr5605
Cotabish A., Dailey D., Miller R., Coxon S. V., Adams C. M. (2021). The next generation science standards and high-ability learners. In Danielian J., Fugate C. M., Fogarty E. (Eds.), Teaching gifted children (pp. 275–282). Routledge.
Creswell J. W. (2021). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Sage.
Delisle J. R. (2012). Reaching those we teach: The five Cs of student engagement. Gifted Child Today, 35(1), 62–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217511427513
Dhahri S., Omri A. (2018). Entrepreneurship contribution to the three pillars of sustainable development: What does the evidence really say? World Development, 106, 64–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.01.008
Efklides A. (2019). Gifted students and self-regulated learning: The MASRL model and its implications for SRL. High Ability Studies, 30(1–2), 79–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2018.1556069
Elme L., Jørgensen M. L., Dandanell G., Mottelson A., Makransky G. (2022). Immersive virtual reality in STEM: Is IVR an effective learning medium and does adding self-explanation after a lesson improve learning outcomes? Educational Technology Research and Development, 70(5), 1601–1626. https://10.1007/s11423-022-10139-3
Eriksson G. (2022). Pretense or belief: Creating meaningful scenarios and simulations for authentic learning about diverse underserved gifted students. Education Sciences, 12(8), Article 532. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12080532
Fakhriyah F., Masfuah S., Roysa M., Rusilowati A., Rahayu E. S. (2017). Student’s science literacy in the aspect of content science? Journal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 6(1), 81–87. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v6i1.7245
Fakolade O. A., Adeniyi S. O. (2010). Efficacy of enrichment triad and self-direct models on academic achievement of gifted students in selected secondary schools in Nigeria. International Journal of Special Education, 25(1), 10–16.
Fauville G., Queiroz A. C. M., Bailenson J. N. (2020). Virtual reality as a promising tool to promote climate change awareness. Technology and Health, 2020, 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-816958-2.00005-8
Fredricks J. A., McColskey W. (2012). The measurement of student engagement: A comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments. In Christenson S. L., Reschly A. L., Wylie C. (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 763–782). Springer US.
Frith E., Miller S., Loprinzi P. D. (2020). A review of experimental research on embodied creativity: Revisiting the mind–body connection. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 54(4), 767–798. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.406
Gallagher S. (2021). Guiding gifted students toward science expertise. In Dixon F., Kettler T. (Eds.), The handbook of secondary gifted education (2nd ed., pp. 333–366). Routledge.
George D., Mallery M. (2010). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference, version 17.0 update (10th ed.). Pearson.
Gibbs R., Poskitt J. (2010). Student engagement in the middle years of schooling (years 7–10): A report to the Ministry of Education. Ministry of Education.
Gong Z., Georgiev G. V. (2020). Literature review: Existing methods using VR to enhance creativity. In Boujut J.-F., Cascini G., Ahmed-Kristensen S., Georgiev G. V., Iivari N. (Eds.), Proceedings of the sixth international conference on design creativity (ICDC 2020) (pp. 117–124). The Design Society. https://doi.org/10.35199/ICDC.2020.15
Gong Z., Lee L. H., Soomro S. A., Nanjappan V., Georgiev G. V. (2022). A systematic review of virtual brainstorming from the perspective of creativity: Affordances, framework, and outlook. Digital Creativity, 33(2), 96–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/14626268.2022.2064879
Gorski A. T., Ranf E. D., Badea D., Halmaghi E. E., Gorski H. (2023). Education for sustainability—Some bibliometric insights. Sustainability, 15(20), Article 14916. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152014916
Grover P., Phutela N., Guess W. (2023). Metaverse and students engagement—Instructors’ perspective. In 2023 IEEE Pune Section International Conference (PuneCon) (pp. 1–6). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/PuneCon58714.2023.10450138
Harris L. R., Brown G. T. (2018). Using self-assessment to improve student learning. Routledge.
He S., Epp C. D., Chen F., Cui Y. (2024). Examining change in students’ self-regulated learning patterns after a formative assessment using process mining techniques. Computers in Human Behavior, 152, Article 108061. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.108061
Hein O., Rauschnabel P., Hassib M., Alt F. (2023, August). Sick in the car, sick in VR? Understanding how real-world susceptibility to dizziness, nausea, and eye strain influences VR motion sickness. In Abdelnour Nocera J., Lárusdóttir M. K., Petrie H., Piccinno A., Winckler M. (Eds.), Human—computer interaction—INTERACT 2023 (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 14143, pp. 552–573). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42283-6_30
Housand A., Reis S. M. (2008). Self-regulated learning in reading: Gifted pedagogy and instructional settings. Journal of Advanced Academics, 20(1), 108–136. https://doi.org/10.4219/jaa-2008-865
Hu W., Adey P. (2002). A scientific creativity test for secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 389–403. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690110098912
Huang H. T., Chang Y. S. (2023). Effects of virtual reality on creative performance and emotions: A study of brainwaves. Computers in Human Behavior, 146, Article 107815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107815
Huang X., Huss J., North L., Williams K., Boyd-Devine A. (2023). Cognitive and motivational benefits of a theory-based immersive virtual reality design in science learning. Computers and Education Open, 4, Article 100124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2023.100124
Ichimura K. (2023). Effects of virtual reality’s viewing medium and the environment’s spatial openness on divergent thinking. PLOS ONE, 18(3), Article e0283632. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283632
Jalhotra A., Sharma S., Dev Sharma S., Pathak A., Lande A. (2024). Application of metaverse in education. In 2024 IEEE 1st Karachi Section Humanitarian Technology Conference (Khi-HTC) (pp. 1–6). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/KHI-HTC60760.2024.10482118
Jiang Y., Clarke-Midura J., Baker R. S., Paquette L., Keller B. (2018). How immersive virtual environments foster self-regulated learning. In Zheng R. (Ed.), Digital technologies and instructional design for personalized learning (pp. 28–54). IGI Global.
Johnson G., Davies S. (2014). Self-regulated learning in digital environments: Theory, research, praxis. British Journal of Research, 1(2), 1–14.
Johnson N. (2012). Examining self regulated learning in relation to certain selected variables. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 5(3), 1–12.
Kanevsky L., Keighley T. (2003). To produce or not to produce? Understanding boredom and the honor in underachievement. Roeper Review, 26(1), 20–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190309554235
Kim E. J., Kim H. K. (2022). The effect of science class using smart devices on the perceptions and scientific attitude of middle school gifted students. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 66(4), 323–332. https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2022.66.4.323
Landis R. N., Reschly A. L. (2013). Reexamining gifted underachievement and dropout through the lens of student engagement. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 36(2), 220–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353213480864
Laurens-Arredondo L. (2021, November). Mobile augmented reality adapted to the Gentry-Gable motivation model: An experience of gifted students. In 2021 40th International Conference of the Chilean Computer Science Society (SCCC) (pp. 1–8). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/SCCC54552.2021.9650370
Lawson A. P., Mayer R. E. (2024). Individual differences in executive function affect learning with immersive virtual reality. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 40(3), 1068–1082. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12925
Lin X. P., Li B. B., Yao Z. N., Yang Z., Zhang M. (2024). The impact of virtual reality on student engagement in the classroom—A critical review of the literature. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, Article 1360574. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1360574
Liu Z., Yu P., Liu J., Pi Z., Cui W. (2023). How do students’ self-regulation skills affect learning satisfaction and continuous intention within desktop-based virtual reality? A structural equation modelling approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 54(3), 667–685. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13278
López-Belmonte J., Pozo-Sánchez S., Moreno-Guerrero A. J., Lampropoulos G. (2023). Metaverse in education: A systematic review. Revista de Educación a Distancia, 23(73), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.6018/red.511421
Luo H., Li X., Zhang J., Zhang F., Liang J., Yin X. (2024). July). Metaverse improves the learning experiences rather than learning outcomes: Evidence from an experimental study in higher education. In 2024 International Symposium on Educational Technology (ISET) (pp. 217–222). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISET61814.2024.00050
Makransky G., Lilleholt L. (2018). A structural equation modeling investigation of the emotional value of immersive virtual reality in education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(5), 1141–1164.
Makransky G., Mayer R. E. (2022). Benefits of taking a virtual field trip in immersive virtual reality: Evidence for the immersion principle in multimedia learning. Educational Psychology Review, 34(3), 1771–1798. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09675-4
Makransky G., Petersen G. B. (2021). The cognitive affective model of immersive learning (CAMIL): A theoretical research-based model of learning in immersive virtual reality. Educational Psychology Review, 33(3), 937–958. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09586-2
Malinin L. H. (2019). How radical is embodied creativity? Implications of 4E approaches for creativity research and teaching. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 2372. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02372
Markowitz D. M., Bailenson J. N. (2021). Virtual reality and the psychology of climate change. Current Opinion in Psychology, 42, 60–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.03.009
Marzetta K., Mason H., Wee B. (2018). ‘Sometimes they are fun and sometimes they are not’: Concept mapping with English Language Acquisition (ELA) and Gifted/Talented (GT) elementary students learning science and sustainability. Education Sciences, 8(1), Article 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8010013
Matovu H., Ungu D. A. K., Won M., Tsai C. C., Treagust D. F., Mocerino M., Tasker R. (2023). Immersive virtual reality for science learning: Design, implementation, and evaluation. Studies in Science Education, 59(2), 205–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2022.2082680
Matthews M. S. (2021). Science curriculum for gifted learners. In Stephens K. R., Karnes F. A. (Eds.), Introduction to curriculum design in gifted education (pp. 175–193). Routledge.
Mayer R. E. (2014). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In Mayer R. E. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 43–71). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139547369.005
Mayer R. E. (2021). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In Mayer R. E., Fiorella L. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 57–72). Cambridge University Press.
Miguel-Alonso I., Checa D., Guillen-Sanz H., Bustillo A. (2024). Evaluation of the novelty effect in immersive virtual reality learning experiences. Virtual Reality, 28(1), Article 27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-023-00926-5
Ministry of National Education. (2024). BILSEM guideline (Guideline No. 64832509). https://umraniyebilimvesanatmerkezi.meb.k12.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/34/21/765047/dosyalar/2024_02/02140122_bilsemyonergesi.pdf?CHK=112ddab0c70ca7d3675cfeb13f54fea
Mukhopadhyay R., Sen M. K. (2013). Scientific creativity: A new emerging field of research: Some considerations. International Journal of Education and Psychological Research, 2(1), 1–9.
Mutlu F., Nacaroglu O. (2019). Examination of perceptions of gifted students about climate change and global warming. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 18(5), 780–192.
Nacaroğlu O., Bektaş O. (2023). The effect of the flipped classroom model on gifted students’ self-regulation skills and academic achievement. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 47, Article 101244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101244
Nanjappan V., Uunila A., Vaulanen J., Välimaa J., Georgiev G. V. (2023). Effects of immersive virtual reality in enhancing creativity. Proceedings of the Design Society, 3, 1585–1594. https://doi.org/10.1017/pds.2023.159
Oppong E., Shore B. M., Muis K. R. (2019). Clarifying the connections among giftedness, metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning: Implications for theory and practice. Gifted Child Quarterly, 63(2), 102–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986218814008
Özarslan M. (2022). Environmental problems according to the gifted and talented students and their solution proposals: A qualitative research. International Journal of New Trends in Arts, Sports & Science Education (IJTASE), 11(4), 201–216.
Palombi T., Galli F., Giancamilli F., D’Amico M., Alivernini F., Gallo L., Neroni P., Predazzi M., De Pietro G., Lucidi F., Giordano A., Chirico A. (2023). The role of sense of presence in expressing cognitive abilities in a virtual reality task: An initial validation study. Scientific Reports, 13(1), Article 13396. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-40510-0
Papanastasiou G., Drigas A., Skianis C., Lytras M., Papanastasiou E. (2019). Virtual and augmented reality effects on K-12, higher and tertiary education students’ twenty-first century skills. Virtual Reality, 23(4), 425–436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-018-0363-2
Park J. (2010, June). Practical ways for teaching and evaluating scientific creativity. In Proceedings of the XIV IOSTE Symposium: Socio-Cultural and Human Values in Science and Technology Education (pp. 1–16). International Organization for Science and Technology Education.
Paz-Baruch N., Hazema H. (2023). Self-regulated learning and motivation among gifted and high-achieving students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics disciplines: Examining differences between students from diverse socioeconomic levels. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 46(1), 34–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/01623532221143825
Pedrosa D., Morgado L., Beck D. (2023). June). Immersive learning environments for self-regulation of learning: A literature review. In International Conference on Immersive Learning (pp. 497–511). Springer Nature.
Petersen G. B., Petkakis G., Makransky G. (2022). A study of how immersion and interactivity drive VR learning. Computers & Education, 179, Article 104429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104429
Phelps V. (2022). Successful online learning with gifted students: Designing online and blended lessons for gifted and advanced learners in grades 5–8. Routledge.
Plass J. L., Hovey C., Saurina Maso A., Fröhlich F., Ghosh S., Olsen A., Perlin K. (2022). Designing effective immersive VR learning experiences. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference of the Immersive Learning Research Network (iLRN2022) Practitioner Proceedings. Immersive Learning Research Network. https://doi.org/10.56198/A6PFY1CBT
Reis I. W., Romeiro A. E., Berg C. H., Ulbricht V. R. (2024). Sociodigital experiences and creativity in the metaverse: An integrative review. Heliyon, 10(7), Article e29047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e29047
Reis S. M. (2021). Self-regulated learning and academically talented students. In J. L. Jolly, D. J. Treffinger, T. F. Inman, & J. F. Smutny (Eds.), Parenting gifted children (pp. 42–52). Routledge.
Ronksley-Pavia M., Neumann M. M. (2020). Conceptualising gifted student (dis) engagement through the lens of learner (re) engagement. Education Sciences, 10(10), Article 274. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10100274
Root-Bernstein R. S., Root-Bernstein M. (2001). Sparks of genius: The thirteen thinking tools of the world’s most creative people. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Saeed S., Zyngier D. (2012). How motivation influences student engagement: A qualitative case study. Journal of Education and Learning, 1(2), 252–267. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v1n2p252
Sakdavong J. C., Burgues M., Huet N. (2019). May). Virtual reality in self-regulated learning: Example in art domain. In Lane H. C., Zvacek S., Uhomoibhi J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2019) (Vol. 2, pp. 79–87). SciTePress. https://doi.org/10.5220/0007718500790087
Saphira H. V., Prahani B. K., Hariyono E., Marianus. (2024). Metaverse: A paradigm shift in STEM education for science learning beyond the review. E3S Web of Conferences, 482, Article 04004. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202448204004
Schroth S. T., Helfer J. A. (2017). Gifted & green: Sustainability/environmental science investigations that promote gifted children’s learning. Gifted Child Today, 40(1), 14–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217516675903
Scurati G. W., Bertoni M., Graziosi S., Ferrise F. (2021). Exploring the use of virtual reality to support environmentally sustainable behavior: A framework to design experiences. Sustainability, 13(2), Article 943. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020943
Shi C., Park J. Y. (2024). A systematic review of the metaverse in formal education. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 16(5), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-04-2024-0162
Shim K. C., Kim H. S., Park Y. C. (2000). Science education and virtual reality. In Application of multi-media in biology education, summer program of Korean Society of Biology Education (pp. 25–37). Korean Society of Biology Education.
Sidek R., Halim L., Buang N. A., Arsad N. M. (2020). Fostering scientific creativity in teaching and learning science in schools: A systematic review. Jurnal Penelitian dan Pembelajaran IPA, 6(1), 13–35.
Sisk D. A. (2009). Making great kids greater: Easing the burden of being gifted. Corwin Press.
Skinner E. A., Kindermann T. A., Furrer C. J. (2009). A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection: Conceptualization and assessment of children’s behavioral and emotional participation in academic activities in the classroom. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69(3), 493–525. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316440832323
Slade M. L. (2021). Global citizenship as a means for teaching environmental education to gifted learners. In Schroth S. T., Daniels J. (Eds.), Building STEM skills through environmental education (pp. 1–13). IGI Global.
Smutny J. F., Von Fremd S. E. (2004). Differentiating for the young child: Teaching strategies across the content areas (K–3). Corwin Press.
Son M. J. (2009). A study of Korean students’ creativity in science using structural equation modeling [Doctoral dissertation, University of Arizona]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
Stenberdt V. A., Makransky G. (2023). Mastery experiences in immersive virtual reality promote pro-environmental waste-sorting behavior. Computers & Education, 198, Article 104760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104760
Taber K. S. (2007). Enriching school science for the gifted learner. Gatsby Science Enhancement Programme.
Tanik Önal N., Önal N. (2021). The effect of augmented reality on the astronomy achievement and interest level of gifted students. Education and Information Technologies, 26(4), 4573–4599. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10474-7
Tekel K. Y., Yaman Y. (2023). Metaverse Risk Perceptions of Gifted Students. International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 10(4), 1035–1049. https://doi.org/10.52380/ijcer.2023.10.4.355
Thornhill-Miller B., Dupont J. M. (2016). Virtual reality and the enhancement of creativity and innovation: Under recognized potential among converging technologies? Journal of Cognitive Education & Psychology, 15(1), 102–121. https://doi.org/10.1891/1945-8959.15.1.102
Turan Gürbüz G., Açıkgül Fırat E., Aydın M. (2020). The adaptation of math and science engagement scales in the context of science course: A validation and reliability study. Adiyaman University Journal of Educational Sciences, 10(2), 122–131. https://doi.org/10.17984/adyuebd.670173
Ucar E., Ustunel H., Civelek T., Umut I. (2017). Effects of using a force feedback haptic augmented simulation on the attitudes of the gifted students towards studying chemical bonds in virtual reality environment. Behaviour & Information Technology, 36(5), 540–547. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2016.1264483
UNESCO. (2020). Education for sustainable development: A roadmap. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000374802
United Nations. (2016). Sustainable development goals: 17 goals to transform our world. https://sdgs.un.org/goals
VanTassel-Baska J., Wood S. M. (2023). The integrated curriculum model. In Renzulli J. S., Gubbins E. J., McMillen K. S., Eckert R. D., Little C. A. (Eds.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 655–691). Routledge.
Villegas-Ch W., García-Ortiz J., Sánchez-Viteri S. Jr. (2024). Educational advances in the metaverse: Boosting learning through virtual and augmented reality and artificial intelligence. IEEE Access, 12, 59093–59109. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3393776
Vogt A. G. (2022). Fostering deep learning in immersive virtual reality: Interplay of learner’s characteristics with internal and external support [Doctoral dissertation, Universität Ulm]. OPARU—Ulm University Publication System. https://oparu.uni-ulm.de/xmlui/handle/123456789/46161
Wang M. T., Fredricks J. A., Ye F., Hofkens T. L., Linn J. S. (2016). The math and science engagement scales: Scale development, validation, and psychometric properties. Learning and Instruction, 43, 16–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.01.008
Wang S. T., Liu L. M., Wang S. M. (2018, June). The design and evaluate of virtual reality immersive learning: The case of serious game “calcium looping for carbon capture.” In 2018 International Conference on System Science and Engineering (ICSSE) (Article 8520002). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSSE.2018.8520002
Wang T., Lajoie S. P. (2023). How does cognitive load interact with self-regulated learning? A dynamic and integrative model. Educational Psychology Review, 35(3), Article 69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09794-6
Wang W. S., Pedaste M., Lin C. J., Lee H. Y., Huang Y. M., Wu T. T. (2024). Signaling feedback mechanisms to promoting self-regulated learning and motivation in virtual reality transferred to real-world hands-on tasks. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(10), 7661–7676. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2331151
Washington A. M., Andersen L. (2016). Efficacy of creative training for gifted science students. In M. K. Demetrikopoulos & J. L. Pecore (Eds.), Interplay of creativity and giftedness in science (pp. 71–85). Brill.
Wigfield A., Eccles J. S. (2002). The development of competence beliefs, expectancies for success, and achievement values from childhood through adolescence. In Wigfield A., Eccles J. S. (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation (pp. 91–120). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012750053-9/50006-1
Winne P. H. (2019). Self-regulated learning in research with gifted learners. High Ability Studies, 30(1–2), 277–287. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2019.1622224
Wu W. L., Hsu Y., Yang Q. F., Chen J. J., Jong M. S. Y. (2023). Effects of the self-regulated strategy within the context of spherical video-based virtual reality on students’ learning performances in an art history class. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(4), 2244–2267. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1878231
Yang X., Lin L., Cheng P. Y., Yang X., Ren Y., Huang Y. M. (2018). Examining creativity through a virtual reality support system. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66, 1231–1254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9604-z
Young G. W., Stehle S., Walsh B. Y., Tiri E. (2020). Exploring virtual reality in the higher education classroom: Using VR to build knowledge and understanding. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 26(8), 904–928. https://doi.org/10.3897/jucs.2020.049
Yu H., Wang J. (2025). Enhancing college students’ creativity through virtual reality technology: A systematic literature review. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05044-y
Zeidner M., Stoeger H. (2019). Self-regulated learning (SRL): A guide for the perplexed. High Ability Studies, 30(1–2), 9–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2019.1589369
Zhang F., Zhang Y., Li G., Luo H. (2023). Using virtual reality interventions to promote social and emotional learning for children and adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Children, 11(1), Article 41. https://doi.org/10.3390/children11010041
Zhao J. H., Panjaburee P., Hwang G. J., Wongkia W. (2024). Effects of a self-regulated-based gamified virtual reality system on students’ English learning performance and affection. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(9), 5509–5536. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2219702
Zimlich S. L. (2016). Motivating gifted students: Technology as a tool for authenticity and autonomy. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 15(13), 1–11.
Zimmerman B. J., Schunk D. H. (2012). Motivation: An essential dimension of self-regulated learning. In Zimmerman B. J., Schunk D. H. (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning (pp. 1–30). Routledge.
Biographies
Yunus Emre Avcu is Assistant Professor of Gifted Education at Necatibey Faculty of Education in Balıkesir University. He has been working with gifted students for more than 10 years. He received his BA in Computer Education & Instructional Technology and MS in Curriculum and Instruction at Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University. He gained a Ph.D. in Curriculum and Instruction at Balıkesir University in November 2019. He has a Ph.D. in Gifted Education at İstanbul University-Cerrahpaşa. His interest areas are gifted education, science education for gifted, differentiation, creativity, design thinking, computational thinking, instructional design, programming education for gifted students, and using technology in gifted education.
Yavuz Yaman is Assistant Professor of Special Education at İstanbul University-Cerrahpaşa. Dr. Yaman received his BA in Biology Education at Dokuz Eylül University and his MS in Elementary Education/Science Education at University of Colorado at Boulder in the United States. He gained his Ph.D. in Special Education at Istanbul University-Cerrahpaşa in 2014. His interest areas are special education, educational technology, teaching methods, gifted education, robotics, and science education.
Cite
Cite
Cite
OR
Download to reference manager
If you have citation software installed, you can download citation data to the citation manager of your choice
Information, rights and permissions
Information
Published In
Article first published online: February 19, 2026
Keywords
Authors
Metrics and citations
Metrics
Publication usage*
Total views and downloads: 136
*Publication usage tracking started in December 2016
Altmetric
See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores
Publications citing this one
Receive email alerts when this publication is cited
Web of Science: 0
Crossref:
There are no citing articles to show.
Figures and tables
Figures & Media
Tables
View Options
Access options
If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:
I am signed in as:
View my profileSign out
I can access personal subscriptions, purchases, paired institutional access and free tools such as favourite journals, email alerts and saved searches.
loading institutional access options
NAGC members can access this journal content using society membership credentials.
NAGC members can access this journal content using society membership credentials.
Alternatively, view purchase options below:
Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.
Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.
