Digital solutions are integrated into education at all levels, becoming integral. Among modern developments, a special place is occupied by immersive services, the implementation of which contributes to increasing student motivation and engagement, improving the assimilation of educational material, the formation of practical skills through simulations, etc. Since the market for immersive services has significantly enriched in recent years and continues to fill dynamically, it is often dificult, and sometimes impossible, for users, including teachers, to choose an appropriate service among hundreds of existing solutions. In this regard, the problem of developing a database of immersive services arises - cataloging services with a balanced filtering system that would consider the needs of teachers and facilitate their search for appropriate solutions. Recent systematic analyses indicate that immersive technologies in secondary education span diverse platforms including virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), mixed reality (MR), and tele-immersive environments, each ofering unique pedagogical afordances for spatial visualization, simulation, and collaborative learning. Meta-analyses demonstrate significant improvements in student engagement (efect size g=0.596-0.603) and learning outcomes, particularly in STEM subjects. The purpose of this article is to substantiate the structure of the catalog of immersive services with the aim of their pedagogically appropriate systematization for general secondary education. We analyzed various catalogs and aggregators of immersive services, comparing their features, filtering systems, advantages, and disadvantages. A survey of 16 experts with experience in scientific research and practical use of immersive services in education was conducted to determine filtering criteria. The developed “Catalog of Immersive Services” includes filtering by category (AR, VR, XR, 360-degree video, 3D-modelling), educational level (grades 1-4, 5-9, 10-11(12)), subject area, interface language, terms of use, and platform compatibility. The catalog serves as a practical resource for teachers to identify and implement appropriate immersive technologies in their educational practice.
Modern education is undergoing significant transformations under the influence of digital technologies
[
Recent research demonstrates exponential growth in immersive technology applications in education. Statistical analysis from the Web of Science database reveals that scientific publications on VR in education increased from 22,010 in 2013 to 82,087 in 2024, while AR publications grew from 3,243 to 25,933 in the same period [41, 42]. This surge reflects both technological maturation and growing recognition of pedagogical benefits, particularly in secondary education contexts where abstract concept visualization and practical skill acquisition are critical [43, 44].
Users of these new technologies (teachers, students, developers) face the problem of finding the necessary services for educational purposes. When choosing a service, it is necessary to take into account various aspects that significantly afect the efectiveness of its use. Therefore, the creation of specialized service catalogs is relevant and appropriate. Given the rapid development of these technologies, research into the scientific and methodological aspects of their implementation and use in general secondary education is relevant and timely.
Along with the undeniable advantages and great potential of immersive developments, there are related problems with their use and serious educational challenges. Thus, the rapid growth of VR/AR services has led to their rapid introduction into education at various levels, causing a certain dispersion and chaos in their use. The market for immersive services has significantly enriched in recent years and continues to fill dynamically. Users, including teachers, often find it dificult, and sometimes impossible, to choose an appropriate service among hundreds of existing solutions. There are compatibility problems, the lack of uniform standards for integrating VR/AR into the educational process, schools risk investing in outdated or unsupported technologies, and teachers find it challenging to choose the appropriate service.
Developing a database of immersive services – cataloging VR/AR services with a balanced filtering system that would consider the needs of teachers and facilitate their search for appropriate solutions – will help solve the outlined problems. The filtering system should consider pedagogical, technological, regulatory, and other aspects of using services.
Scientific interest in immersive technologies in various fields of education and science has almost doubled over the past three years, as confirmed by statistical data on publications indexed by the international database Web of Science (table 1, figure 1). VR AR XR 360-degree video 2013
The scientific understanding of the phenomenon of immersive technologies (derived from “to
immerse”) is substantiated in the works of many researchers. The essence of the concept of “immersive
technologies” was considered by Simpkins et al. [45], Pavithra [46], Kirandeep [47], Mütterlein [48], Suh
and Prophet [49], Ahmadi and Gilardi [50], Mystakidis and Lympouridis [51], Lytvynova and Soroko
[52]. The advantages of using immersive technologies, VR, AR, XR in education were studied by
Merchant et al. [53], Parong and Mayer [
Recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses provide robust evidence for the pedagogical efectiveness of immersive technologies. A comprehensive meta-analysis by Zhou [59] examining 46 studies with 5,415 students found that online argumentation activities using immersive platforms showed significant positive efects on both “Learn to Argue” (Hedges’ g = 0.603) and “Argue to Learn” (Hedges’ g = 0.596) abilities. Furthermore, research indicates that VR environments are particularly efective for 22,010 3,243 2,323 STEM education, with the greatest impact observed in natural science topics, while AR shows stronger adoption in K-12 contexts compared to higher education [41, 60].
In a number of publications, experts emphasize the feasibility and advantages of cataloging apps. Various aspects of cataloging software applications are presented by Shuqing et al. [61], who analyzes XRZoo, a large-scale and versatile dataset containing 12,528 free XR applications from nine app stores. The dataset covers all XR techniques (AR, MR, VR) and diferent usage areas, providing detailed metainformation about each application.
Kwid et al. [62] reviews AI tools and platforms for K-12 education and provides practical guidance for teachers on using these tools. AI tools are classified by purpose: educational, administrative, and analytical. The review conducted in the article aims to help teachers choose the appropriate AI tools for specific purposes.
Recent research identifies critical factors for efective immersive technology integration in secondary education (table 2). A study by Boel et al. [60] involving 2,640 secondary education students found that behavioral intention to use immersive VR was significantly influenced by performance expectancy, efort expectancy, and personal innovativeness, accounting for 50% of variance. Additionally, genderspecific design considerations are crucial, as research by Portuguez-Castro and Santos Garduño [63] demonstrated that female students showed superior engagement across all motivational dimensions (attention, relevance, satisfaction, confidence) when using VR applications.
During the study, theoretical methods of scientific knowledge were applied: analysis, synthesis, generalization of national (Ukrainian) and foreign scientific sources on the research problem; analysis of various catalogs and aggregators of immersive services; comparison of their features, filtering systems, advantages, and disadvantages.
To determine the feasibility of filtering options in the “Catalog of Immersive Services”, a practical method was used – a survey of experts (16 people with experience in scientific research and practical use of immersive services in education, of which 12.5% are doctors of sciences, 50% are PhD, 37.5% are researchers without a scientific degree).
Currently, some resources in the web space aggregate immersive services according to specific parameters. For example: • Vrara.com – a selection of VR/AR solutions from the VR/AR Association (VRARA); • Commonsense.org – contains various resources (reviews, analytics, services, lessons, etc.), the ability to filter (by age (grade), resource type, subject, language (English, Spain), etc.); • EdTechIndex.org – a selection of services of various types, over 1800 units. A filtering system has been developed based on various categories – age, subject area, target audience, resource type, purpose, etc. However, the set of immersive services is quite limited: the catalog contains only 21 VR services, 5 AR services, and 3 XR services; • Classvr.com – a platform for schools with ready-made VR lessons. Ofers high-quality immersive learning solutions, which, however, are paid and mainly in English; • MelScience.com – contains a list of specialized services – for studying STEM, mathematics, physics, chemistry, and medicine. In total – about 45 services; • Sketchfab.com – contains an extensive library of 3D models for AR/VR. These are not ready-made solutions, but can be used in the development of such solutions.
Some of the existing resources ofer the ability to filter by technology (VR, AR, XR, etc.), by subject area (STEM, mathematics, biology, history, etc.), by age group (preschool education, elementary school, middle/high school, higher education, adult education, etc.), by price (free, paid, demo versions), by supported platforms (iOS, Android, Web, etc.), by interface language (monolingual (mostly English), multilingual), etc. When describing a service, such aspects as its name, link to the oficial page or website, an overview of functionality, equipment requirements, and screenshots/videos are mainly considered.
However, the resources that currently exist have some shortcomings that reduce their usefulness for implementation in the educational process, in particular in Ukraine: • existing aggregators usually ofer a regular list of services in a list limited to the name and their description, sometimes a link. At the same time, the possibility of filtering is either completely absent or contains only a few options; • a small selection of immersive services - the vast majority of existing databases and catalogs aggregate services of various types, excluding AR/VR altogether or including only a small number of them (small selection); • a language barrier - existing developments do not have a Ukrainian-language interface; they are mainly English-language; • some aggregators work only on a paid subscription (e.g., Labster), which imposes an additional ifnancial burden on schools; • some platforms (e.g., Meta/Oculus) collect user data, which may contradict Ukrainian laws on protecting personal data about children.
In this regard, there was a need to create a catalog of immersive services that could be used to support the educational process in general secondary education institutions in Ukraine.
There are three key components required for any immersive technology to function: 1) hardware (equipment) – high-quality hardware is of paramount importance to ensure a realistic and practical immersion efect: headsets, sensors, controllers, and haptic devices that provide physical feedback (Oculus Quest, HTC VIVE Focus, etc.); smartphones equipped with a camera and sensors, etc.; 2) software – the software component creates the digital environment where users interact. Various programming languages, libraries, and software development kits are used to create immersive environments, ranging from realistic simulations to fantasy worlds. Good software provides good integration between the hardware and the user interface. 3) user interface (UI) – an essential component of immersive technology, referring to how users interact with the digital environment. An intuitive and natural user interface contributes significantly to an immersive experience. Factors to consider include: • User comfort and ease of use – users should be able to interact with the digital environment without stress or discomfort, which can be achieved by providing an intuitive interface. • Integration: the user interface should be well integrated with the hardware component, supporting the user’s convenience and ease of interaction.
Considering these aspects will help ensure a positive user experience and broader adoption of the technology, which is especially important when using it for educational purposes.
In addition, it is essential to enable the selection of services taking into account the following aspects: • purpose of use – think about the subject area for which the service is planned, what goals we are trying to achieve by implementing a new technology, and determine the specific tasks that need to be performed. Understanding the needs of use allows you to decide which functions are most important; • user experience – determine the target group of users and assess their overall understanding of using immersive technology (is prior training, instruction, training required?); • technical requirements – check whether the selected technology is compatible with the devices, software, and networks used by the team you are using; • scalability – consider the possible allowable number of users, whether the technology provides the desired level of collaboration and interaction, whether it will allow you to reach the required number of users; • cost – assess the cost of the technology, including any hardware, software, or licensing fees, and determine whether this fits within the available budget; • localization – determine which languages are available in the settings and whether there is a language barrier; • security – assess the security features of the technology, including data protection, encryption, and access control to ensure that confidential information is protected; • support – determine the level of support available from the technology provider, including technical assistance, training, and user forums.
Thus, when creating a “Catalog of Immersive Services”, it is essential to provide such a filtering option so that the teacher can choose the most appropriate service, taking into account their own experience, material, and technical capabilities.
To determine the appropriateness of the selected filtering options in the “Catalog of Immersive Services”, we surveyed experts – 16 people with experience in scientific research and practical use of immersive services in education (12.5% – doctors of science, 50% – PhD, 37.5% – researchers without a scientific degree).
The researchers were ofered a list of criteria for selecting immersive services (what should the user (teacher) be guided by when choosing a service?), the importance of which had to be assessed on a Likert scale from 1 to 10, where “1” is entirely insignificant, “10” is very important.
The experts selected the following criteria for choosing immersive services as the most important: • subject-oriented nature of the service (e.g., for physics simulations, for anatomy visualizations, etc.); • “complexity” or “simplicity” of the service (need for prior preparation to work with the service); • availability of ready-made visualizations/simulations; • the possibility of creating your visualizations/simulations; • compatibility of the service with existing technical means (ability to reproduce on the existing operating system, ability to use on existing gadgets, with available disk space, etc.); • scalability (does the service allow to reach the required number of users); • cost (is the service free? If not, is the price afordable?); • localization (does the service support the Ukrainian language?); • security (security features of the service, including data protection, encryption, and access control to ensure the protection of confidential information, etc.); • support (high-quality and prompt technical support from the provider). • 8-10 points – critical (in the table marked as “+”); • 5-7 – possible (in the table marked as “+/–”); • 1-4 – not important (in the table marked as “–”).
From the data presented in table 3, we can draw the following conclusions: • all the proposed criteria are appropriate to be used when selecting immersive services since each criterion received expert ratings in the range of 5-10 on a 10-point Likert scale (which we summarized as “very important” and “possible”); • the experts excluded none of the proposed criteria (none received low scores in the range of 1-4, which would characterize it as “not important”); • the proposed criteria can be used when developing a filtering system in the “Catalog of Immersive Services” to simplify the search for appropriate services by secondary school teachers.
Before creating the “Catalog of Immersive Services”, the task was set to obtain the following results: • a convenient filtering system that takes into account the needs of the target group; • an attractive and convenient presentation of data at the stage of use; • the catalog should provide convenient filling and editing for its editors.
The catalog was designed using a no-code approach, without the need to pay for services or infrastructure during its use.
Given the task set, Softr (https://softr.io/) was chosen to create the catalog – a service for creating websites and web applications without code.
In the free tarif plan, Softr allows you to: • create an interface to data that will be stored in Airtable, Google Sheets, or Notion; • use the main types of blocks when creating, such as list, grid, table, form, object detail, and others; • have up to 10 users who can log in using a password or Google account (in our case, these are moderators who add new services to the catalog or check services added by unregistered visitors before publication); • serve an unlimited number of users; • connect your domain (in our case, we used our domain in the pp.ua zone – the only zone in the
Ukrainian segment that provides the opportunity to register a domain for free); • set up integration with Google Analytics and/or Google Tag Manager.
We also analyzed certain limitations inherent in Softr and also identified ways to solve potential related problems: • in the free tarif plan, the service allows the created web application to work with a maximum of 1000 records (immersive services). Achieving the threshold value by the catalog would mean its demand and usefulness for users. In this case, the task of expansion will arise, which can be achieved by moving away from the no-code approach, rewriting the interface part of the catalog using, for example, the Astro framework (https://astro.build/) and Cloudflare Pages hosting (https://pages.cloudflare.com/). At the same time, the possibility of unrestricted use of the catalog will continue to be preserved; • when creating the catalog, Softr allowed you to choose the sorting of elements only when creating a web application and not during use. We bypassed the restriction on sorting selection by creating an additional page on which you can view the catalog elements in the reverse order of the time they were added to the catalog.
Figure 4 shows a description of one of the services as it is displayed in the catalog. In addition to the functionality and possibilities of use, the description also contains a link to this service and screenshots. This also helps in deciding on the appropriateness of a particular service for educational purposes.
Research consistently demonstrates that teacher training and support are critical factors for successful immersive technology integration. A longitudinal study by Mills et al. [64] found that while teachers’ beliefs about inquiry-based learning improved after VR implementation, their actual classroom practices remained unchanged without continuous professional development. This highlights the need for comprehensive support frameworks that bridge the gap between technological potential and pedagogical practice (table 4).
In the future, it is planned to create a separate function in the catalog, “Compatibility Calculator”, with which the user can set their preferences (in the form of corresponding coeficients), and the system will calculate an integral indicator for each service. This will allow you to optimize the choice of the necessary service further.
In the current digital transformation of education, immersive technologies occupy a special place. Their implementation is less intensive in general secondary education than in higher and vocational education. Still, it has significant prospects in increasing student motivation and engagement, improving the assimilation of educational material, developing critical thinking and problem-solving skills, and forming practical skills through simulations, gamification, etc.
Along with the undeniable advantages and great potential of immersive developments, there is a Framework component Technical training Pedagogical integration Content creation Continuous support Evaluation methods
Description
Implementation strategy Hardware setup, software navigation, Hands-on workshops, video tutorials troubleshooting Curriculum alignment, lesson design, as- Collaborative planning sessions, exemsessment methods plar lessons Developing custom VR/AR materials Template libraries, authoring tools train
ing Ongoing assistance, community build- Online forums, peer mentoring, regular ing check-ins Measuring impact on learning outcomes Pre/post assessments, student feedback tools problem with their organization and cataloging to ensure a convenient search for appropriate services for use by teachers in the educational process. A review of the literature and some existing online resources showed that existing catalogs and service aggregators have shortcomings and do not fully provide the functionality necessary for educators. Typically, such catalogs are not specialized and do not allow you to search for the required services by specialized attributes.
Our analysis, informed by comprehensive research spanning 2018-2024, reveals that efective catalogization must address multiple dimensions: technological diversity (VR, AR, MR, tele-immersive platforms), pedagogical alignment, teacher support mechanisms, and context-specific implementation challenges. The integration of systematic filtering criteria based on expert consensus and empirical evidence ensures that the catalog serves as both a practical tool and a framework for informed decision-making in educational technology adoption.
In this regard, there was a need to create a “Catalog of Immersive Services”, which satisfies the key search needs of teachers, who can choose the optimal VR/AR services and take advantage of their advantages in teaching various subjects (figure 5). The catalog contains a convenient filtering system, which took into account the results of a survey by a group of experts. In particular, the catalog allows you to select services by category, educational level, subject for which the service will be used, interface language, and payment terms.
Identify educational need Apply catalog filters
Evaluate options Implement and monitor
Update catalog Collect feedback
We consider it appropriate to recommend the “Catalog of Immersive Services” to teachers for use in the educational process.
Based on our findings and the comprehensive analysis of current research trends, we propose the following directions for future development: 1. Conduct extended research (minimum 6-12 months) to assess the sustained impact of immersive technologies on learning outcomes, particularly in Ukrainian secondary schools. 2. Create culturally relevant, Ukrainian-language immersive content aligned with national curriculum standards, addressing the current dominance of English-language resources. 3. Develop and evaluate low-cost immersive solutions suitable for resource-limited schools, particularly in rural areas where infrastructure challenges persist. 4. Establish comprehensive training programs that combine technical skills with pedagogical strategies, incorporating the TPaCK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) framework. 5. Develop new assessment tools specifically designed for evaluating learning in immersive environments, moving beyond traditional testing methods. 6. Establish clear protocols for data privacy, student safety, and ethical use of immersive technologies in educational settings, particularly concerning minors.
Further research should be directed to studying the efect of the widespread implementation of the catalog of immersive services, reflections of users of this catalog, substantiation of the methodological foundations of its use, in particular for various subject areas.
The authors have not employed any generative AI tools. Rih, Ukraine, May 11, 2021, volume 2898 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org, 2021, pp. 107–118. URL: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2898/paper05.pdf. [40] A. V. Riabko, T. A. Vakaliuk, O. V. Zaika, R. P. Kukharchuk, I. V. Novitska, Gamification method using Minecraft for training future teachers of computer science, in: T. A. Vakaliuk, V. V. Osadchyi, O. P. Pinchuk (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Digital Transformation of Education (DigiTransfEd 2024) co-located with 19th International Conference on ICT in Education, Research and Industrial Applications (ICTERI 2024), Lviv, Ukraine, September 23-27, 2024, volume 3771 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org, 2024, pp. 22–35. URL: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3771/ paper26.pdf. [41] T.-C. Huang, H.-P. Tseng, Extended Reality in Applied Sciences Education: A Systematic Review,
Applied Sciences 15 (2025) 4038. doi:10.3390/app15074038. [42] Z. Wei, M. Yuan, Research on the Current Situation and Future Development Trend of Immersive
Virtual Reality in the Field of Education, Sustainability 15 (2023) 7531. doi:10.3390/su15097531. [43] T.-C. Hsu, W.-N. Wen, C.-S. Liao, Y.-F. Tu, M.-J. Lee, Virtual reality in P-12 education for improving presence, immersion, and 4C skills: A systematic review of empirical research, Thinking Skills and Creativity 58 (2025) 101918. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2025.101918. [44] B. Maraza-Quispe, V. H. Rosas-Iman, L. Casa-Zeballos, et al., A Mixed-Methods Approach to Determine the Impact of Immersive Learning on Achieving Technological Competencies in Basic Education, International Journal of Information and Education Technology 15 (2025) 835–846. doi:10.18178/ijiet.2025.15.4.2290. [45] S. D. Simpkins, P. D. Allen, N. W. DeMatt, Overview of Immersive Technology: Terminology, State of the Art, and APL Eforts, Johns Hopkins APL Technical Digest 35 (2020) 161–168. URL: https://secwww.jhuapl.edu/techdigest/content/techdigest/pdf/V35-N03/35-03-Simpkins.pdf. [46] A. Pavithra, An Emerging Immersive Technology-A Survey, International Journal of Innovative
Research & Growth 6 (2020) 119–130. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338819764. [47] K. Kirandeep, Analyzing the Benefits and Value of Immersive Technology, International Journal for Research Trends and Innovation 6 (2021) 51–53. URL: https://ijrti.org/papers/IJRTI2108009.pdf. [48] J. Mütterlein, The Three Pillars of Virtual Reality? Investigating the Roles of Immersion, Presence, and Interactivity, in: 51st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), 2018. doi:10.24251/HICSS.2018.174. [49] A. Suh, J. Prophet, The state of immersive technology research: a literature analysis, Computers in Human Behavior 86 (2018) 77–90. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.04.019. [50] S. B. B. Ahmadi, M. Gilardi, Work-in-Progress—Immersive Learning: Challenges and Trends, in: 2024 10th International Conference of the Immersive Learning Research Network (iLRN) Proceedings - Selected Academic Contributions, 2024, pp. 34–40. doi:10.56198/U6C0WV2UH. [51] S. Mystakidis, V. Lympouridis, Immersive Learning, Encyclopedia 3 (2023) 396–405. doi:10.3390/ encyclopedia3020026. [52] S. H. Lytvynova, N. V. Soroko, Interaction in an Educational Environment with Virtual and Augmented Reality, Information Technologies and Learning Tools 98 (2023) 13–30. doi:10.33407/ itlt.v98i6.5433. [53] Z. Merchant, E. T. Goetz, L. Cifuentes, W. Keeney-Kennicutt, T. J. Davis, Efectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students’ learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education: a metaanalysis, Computers & Education 70 (2014) 29–40. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.033. [54] I. Fitrianto, A. Saif, Role of Virtual Reality in Enhancing Experiential Learning: A Comparative Study of Traditional and Immersive Learning Environments, International Journal of Post Axial: Futuristic Teaching and Learning 2 (2023) 1–15. URL: https://journal.amorfati.id/index.php/ postaxial/article/view/300. [55] J. Shi, J. Sitthiworachart, T. Ratanaolarn, Tracking the New Trends in Immersive Virtual RealityAssisted Foreign Language Education: A Systematic Review of Empirical Studies, World Journal of English Language 13 (2023) 154. doi:10.5430/wjel.v13n7p154. [56] M.-B. Ibáñez, C. Delgado-Kloos, Augmented reality for STEM learning: A systematic review, Computers & Education 123 (2018) 109–123. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.002. [57] L. M. Parshukova, S. V. Parshukov, The use of virtual and augmented reality technologies in the professional activities of a computer science teacher, Innovative pedagogy 55 (2023) 183–186. doi:10.32782/2663-6085/2023/55.2.38. [58] S. Palamar, K. Brovko, S. Semerikov, Enhancing Foreign Language Learning in Ukraine: Immersive Technologies as Catalysts for Cognitive Interest and Achievement, in: A. Anisimov, V. Snytyuk, A. Chris, A. Pester, F. Mallet, H. Tanaka, I. Krak, K. Henke, O. Chertov, O. Marchenko, S. Bozóki, V. Tsyganok, V. Vovk (Eds.), Selected Papers of the X International Scientific Conference “Information Technology and Implementation” (IT&I-2023). Conference Proceedings, Kyiv, Ukraine, November 20 - 21, 2023, volume 3624 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org, 2023, pp. 69–81. URL: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3624/Paper_7.pdf. [59] D. Zhou, “Learn to Argue” and “Argue to Learn”: meta-analysis of efective instructional design for online scientific argumentation activities, Interactive Learning Environments 32 (2024) 4857–4880. doi:10.1080/10494820.2023.2205904. [60] C. Boel, T. Rotsaert, M. Valcke, Y. Rosseel, A. Vanhulsel, T. Schellens, Are Students Ready to Be Immersed? Acceptance of Mobile Immersive Virtual Reality by Secondary Education Students, in: M.-L. Bourguet, J. M. Krüger, D. Pedrosa, A. Dengel, A. Peña-Rios, J. Richter (Eds.), Immersive Learning Research Network, volume 1904 of Communications in Computer and Information Science, Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham, 2024, pp. 84–95. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-47328-9_6. [61] L. Shuqing, C. Zhang, C. Gao, M. Lyu, XRZoo: A Large-Scale and Versatile Dataset of Extended
Reality (XR) Applications, 2024. URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2412.06759v2. arXiv:2412.06759v2. [62] G. Kwid, N. Sarty, D. Yang, A Review of AI Tools: Definitions, Functions, and Applications for K-12 Education, AI, Computer Science and Robotics Technology 3 (2024) 1–22. doi:10.5772/ acrt.20240048. [63] M. Portuguez-Castro, H. Santos Garduño, Beyond Traditional Classrooms: Comparing Virtual Reality Applications and Their Influence on Students’ Motivation, Education Sciences 14 (2024) 963. doi:10.3390/educsci14090963. [64] K. Mills, D. Jass Ketelhut, X. Gong, Change of Teacher Beliefs, But Not Practices, Following Integration of Immersive Virtual Environment in the Classroom, Journal of Educational Computing Research 57 (2019) 1786–1811. doi:10.1177/0735633119854034.