Enhancing pre-service teachers' classroom management competency in a large class context: the role of fully immersive virtual reality

Classroom management competency encompasses the knowledge and skills teachers need to maintain a positive, productive learning environment. Pre-service teachers frequently report difficulties translating theory into practice and handling disruptive behaviors due to limited authentic practice opportunities in traditional preparation (e.g., videos, role plays, discussions). Immersive virtual reality (IVR) offers authentic, situated, interactive practice beyond the constraints of conventional methods. Prior IVR systems (e.g., Breaking Bad Behavior, TrainCM2) target disruptive behavior training, but largely overlook the challenges inherent in large-class contexts typical in public schools. To address this gap, the authors developed ClassMaster, an IVR system simulating a large classroom with realistic student behaviors. The study investigates IVR’s effectiveness versus video-based learning on pre-service teachers’ outcomes, focusing on large classes. Research questions: (1) How effective is IVR-based learning compared to video-based learning in improving classroom management competency among pre-service teachers? (2) What is the impact of IVR-based learning compared to video-based learning on pre-service teachers’ attitudes and self-efficacy? (3) What is the impact of IVR-based learning compared to video-based learning on pre-service teachers’ reflective behaviors? (4) What benefits and challenges do pre-service teachers perceive in IVR-based versus video-based learning?

The review outlines classroom management’s importance for student engagement, achievement, and teacher well-being, and details how disruptive behaviors (e.g., off-task, defiance, aggression) negatively affect classrooms. Many pre-service programs emphasize theory over practice, leaving pre-service teachers underprepared for behavior management. VR for teacher training is categorized by immersion: non-immersive (desktop), semi-immersive (large screens or mixed reality), and fully immersive (HMD-based IVR). While desktop and semi-immersive tools offer benefits, IVR provides higher presence, interactivity, and realism, simulating authentic student behaviors and teacher-student interactions. Existing IVR classroom-management systems (e.g., BBB, TrainCM2) demonstrate potential but have limited applicability to large-class scenarios. Large classes increase complexity, stress, and difficulty maintaining order and providing individualized attention, especially for pre-service teachers. IVR’s immersive learning can enhance engagement, deeper processing, memory retention, and can modulate emotional arousal; however, excessive immersion may distract cognitive processing. Overall, IVR holds promise to deliver authentic, cost-effective practice that better prepares teachers for complex classroom dynamics, particularly in large-class contexts.

Design: Quasi-experimental study with random assignment to two conditions comparing IVR-based learning (ClassMaster) to video-based learning. Participants: N=57 pre-service teachers (16 men, 41 women), ages 22–26 (mean ~23), educational technology majors at a teacher education institution in Jiangsu Province, China. All had prior internships and prior exposure to both IVR and video-based learning. Random assignment: IVR group n=33; video group n=24. Informed consent obtained; IRB approval from School of Smart Education, Jiangsu Normal University (JSNUSE202301, 1 April 2023). Intervention and materials: - Introductory classroom management video (10 min) covering core principles. - IVR condition: ClassMaster system session (~15 min). Trainee in HMD navigates a large virtual classroom (48 student avatars), interacts with students, delivers instruction (slides), and manages problem behaviors. Instructor monitors via PC GUI, controls virtual student behaviors (e.g., dozing off, daydreaming, phone use, whispering, fighting) and provides scaffolded feedback (positive/constructive tips) in real time. - Video condition: 15-min problem-behavior management instructional video with six scenarios mirroring ClassMaster, reflection pauses, and strategy presentations. ClassMaster system details: Client-server architecture networked via Photon Fusion. Trainee uses HMD; instructor uses PC with 2D GUI to monitor, trigger/terminate student behaviors, and deliver feedback. Virtual classroom modeled to resemble public school seating, capacity 48, with individualized avatars (Asian characteristics, name tags). Student behaviors include introverted (dozing, daydreaming, phone use) and extroverted (whispering, fighting), plus standard actions (answering, sitting, writing). Built in Unity 2021.3.26f1; hardware: PICO 4 HMD (Snapdragon XR2 Gen1, 2160×2160 per eye, 105° FOV, 8GB RAM). Instructor PC: Intel i9-13900K, 16 GB RAM, NVIDIA T400 GPU. Procedure (four stages): - Stage 1 (pre): Pre-test classroom management competency; pre-questionnaires on self-efficacy and attitudes. - Stage 2 (learning): All watch 10-min introductory video; then IVR group completes ~15-min ClassMaster session; video group watches 15-min scenario video. - Stage 3 (post): Post-test classroom management competency; reflective thinking questionnaire. - Stage 4 (delayed, 20 days later): Delayed competency test; delayed questionnaires on self-efficacy and attitudes; semi-structured interviews. Measures: - Classroom Management Competency Test: Short-answer responses to typical misbehavior scenarios (e.g., eating, sleeping). Scored 0–15 per item on five criteria: supports students’ physical/mental development; maintains class order/learning; respects students; feasibility; supports behavior change. Inter-rater reliability (Spearman): pre 0.71, post 0.81, delayed 0.85. - Classroom Management Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (CMSEQ): 4 items (5-point Likert), adapted from Emmer & Hickman (1991) CM/discipline subscale; Cronbach’s α=0.77. - Learning Attitudes toward Classroom Management: 5 items from Hwang & Chang (2011) (5-point Likert); α=0.70. - Reflective Thinking Scale: 3 items (5-point Likert) adapted from Ai-Lim Lee et al. (2010); α=0.81. - Semi-structured interviews (20 days post): Questions on durability of impact, most beneficial aspects, key learnings, and future interest. Apparatus: IVR setup as above; video group used a laptop (Intel i5-13500H, 15.6" 1920×1080 display). Data analysis: SPSS 26.0. Normality assessed with Shapiro–Wilk. Levene’s tests for homogeneity. One-way ANCOVA for post and delayed outcomes with pre-test as covariate and group as IV; Mann–Whitney U test for reflective thinking (non-normal distribution at post). Qualitative interview data were thematically analyzed by two researchers; four categories derived with representative quotes.

- Classroom management competency (post-test): No significant difference between IVR and video conditions after controlling for pre-test (F=0.286, p=0.595, η²=0.005). Adjusted means: Video 13.72 (SD 1.97), IVR 13.93 (SD 1.45). - Classroom management competency (delayed test, 20 days): IVR significantly outperformed video (F=12.550, p=0.001, η²=0.189). Adjusted means: Video 12.36 (SD 1.78), IVR 13.73 (SD 1.51), indicating superior long-term retention for IVR. - Classroom management self-efficacy (delayed): No significant difference (F=1.340, p=0.252, η²=0.024). Adjusted means: Video 3.75 (SD 0.43), IVR 3.86 (SD 0.39). - Learning attitudes toward classroom management (delayed): IVR significantly higher than video (F=9.229, p=0.004, η²=0.146). Adjusted means: Video 4.29 (SD 0.42), IVR 4.57 (SD 0.34). - Reflective thinking (post): No significant difference (Mann–Whitney U=361.00, Z=−0.578, p=0.564). Means: Video 4.26 (SD 0.43), IVR 4.14 (SD 0.66). - Qualitative interviews: IVR participants frequently cited “innovative and interesting,” “positive impact and enduring effects,” and “practical application and skill development.” Many reported deeper impressions and longer-lasting retention due to immersion and interactivity. Video participants noted immediate usefulness but more rapid forgetting. Suggestions included longer and more frequent training sessions.

The findings address the research questions as follows: (1) Both IVR and video improved immediate classroom management competency, but only IVR yielded significantly better long-term retention, suggesting that immersion, authenticity, and interactivity promote deeper processing and memory consolidation. (2) Self-efficacy did not differ across groups, potentially reflecting short intervention duration or sample characteristics; however, attitudes were more positive in the IVR group, indicating that immersive practice enhances perceived value and interest in classroom management. (3) Reflective thinking was comparable between groups; both modalities supported reflection, with a non-significant trend favoring IVR. (4) Qualitative evidence emphasized IVR’s realism and interactivity as drivers of durable learning, skill development, and integration of theory with practice, whereas video learning was perceived as more easily forgotten over time. Collectively, IVR appears to complement traditional methods, offering advantages particularly for long-term knowledge retention and fostering positive attitudes in large-class management training. The study contributes to literature on IVR in teacher education and underscores contextual and design factors influencing its impact.

The study compares IVR-based and video-based training for pre-service teachers’ classroom management in large-class contexts. Both approaches improved immediate competency, but IVR led to superior long-term retention and more positive attitudes toward classroom management, with no significant differences in self-efficacy or reflective thinking. Theoretically, results support the pedagogical affordances of IVR for deeper engagement and knowledge consolidation. Practically, they recommend integrating IVR simulations into teacher education to complement conventional training, especially for large-class scenarios. Future work should refine IVR design, examine mechanisms underlying long-term effects, extend intervention duration, and evaluate impacts in authentic classrooms across varied contexts.

- Heavy reliance on self-report measures and interviews; lacks objective/physiological indicators of behavior and stress. Future studies should include physiological measures. - Classroom management competency was not assessed in real classrooms; future work should include direct observation and evaluation in authentic settings. - Gender imbalance (more women than men) may limit generalizability; future research should aim for more balanced samples. - Short training duration; participants suggested longer or more frequent sessions to enhance learning and retention. - Need to explore long-term impacts, mechanisms of effectiveness (e.g., emotional arousal, presence), and applicability across diverse educational contexts.