Rethinking Higher Education/Chapter 8/en-zh

Chapter 8 — Bilingual View (EN | ZH) — EN only · ZH only · Book Overview

Chapter 8: Virtual Reality and Smart Learning Spaces

Martin Woesler

English (Source)	中文 (Target)
== Virtual Reality and Smart Learning Spaces: Immersive Technologies in Chinese and European Universities ==	== 虚拟现实与智慧学习空间：中欧大学中的沉浸式技术 ==
Martin Woesler	Martin Woesler
Hunan Normal University	湖南师范大学
Abstract	摘要
Immersive technologies — virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), and extended reality (XR) — are transforming higher education from a predominantly text-and-lecture-based enterprise into one that can simulate complex environments, enable experiential learning at scale, and connect students across geographic boundaries. The global VR in education market, valued at USD 14.55 billion in 2023, is projected to reach USD 65.55 billion by 2032, with the Asia Pacific region growing fastest at a compound annual rate of 22 percent. This article provides a systematic comparison of how Chinese and European universities are deploying these technologies. China has developed 215 virtual simulation training bases, launched the iLAB-X platform serving 2,672 universities with over 13 million participants, and won the 2022 UNESCO Prize for ICT in Education for its National Smart Education Platform. European universities have pursued a more distributed approach through Erasmus+ and Horizon-funded projects, with systematic reviews documenting positive learning outcomes across 71 comparative studies and meta-analyses reporting a moderate positive effect size (Hedges’ g = 0.524) for VR-based teacher education. We examine the evidence for learning effectiveness, the emerging Edu-Metaverse concept, infrastructure costs and equity challenges, and the physiological and pedagogical limitations of immersive technologies. We argue that while VR offers genuine pedagogical benefits — particularly for experiential learning in contexts where real-world practice is dangerous, expensive, or logistically impossible — its deployment must be guided by pedagogical purpose rather than technological enthusiasm, and its costs must be weighed against alternative investments in educational quality.	沉浸式技术——虚拟现实（VR）、增强现实（AR）和扩展现实（XR）——正在将高等教育从一种以文本和讲座为主的事业转变为一种能够模拟复杂环境、大规模实现体验式学习并跨越地理界限连接学生的事业。2023年全球教育VR市场价值145.5亿美元，预计到2032年将达到655.5亿美元，亚太地区以22%的年复合增长率增长最快。本文系统比较了中国和欧洲大学部署这些技术的方式。中国已建设215个虚拟仿真实训基地，推出了服务2,672所大学、超过1,300万参与者的iLAB-X平台，并凭借国家智慧教育平台荣获2022年联合国教科文组织信息通信技术教育奖。欧洲大学则通过Erasmus+和"地平线"资助项目采取了更分散的方法，系统性综述记录了71项比较研究的积极学习成果，荟萃分析报告了VR师范教育的中等正向效应量（Hedges' g = 0.524）。我们考察了学习有效性的证据、新兴的教育元宇宙概念、基础设施成本与公平性挑战，以及沉浸式技术的生理和教学局限性。我们认为，虽然VR提供了真正的教学益处——特别是对于在真实实践具有危险性、高成本或在后勤上不可能的情境中的体验式学习——但其部署必须由教学目的而非技术热情来指导，其成本必须与教育质量的其他替代投资进行权衡。
Keywords: virtual reality, smart classrooms, immersive learning, Edu-Metaverse, higher education, China education technology, European universities, VR effectiveness, smart education platform, XR	关键词：虚拟现实、智慧课堂、沉浸式学习、教育元宇宙、高等教育、中国教育技术、欧洲大学、VR有效性、智慧教育平台、XR
1. Introduction	1. 引言
The promise of virtual reality in education is as old as VR itself. Since the earliest flight simulators of the 1960s, the intuition that learning by doing — even virtual doing — is superior to learning by reading or listening has driven successive waves of investment in immersive educational technology. What distinguishes the current moment is the convergence of several factors: the dramatic reduction in VR hardware costs, the maturation of software development tools, the COVID-19 pandemic’s normalization of technology-mediated learning, and the entry of both the Chinese government and the European Union as major institutional actors in the deployment of immersive technologies for education.	虚拟现实在教育中的前景承诺与VR技术本身一样久远。自1960年代最早的飞行模拟器以来，"做中学"——即使是虚拟地做——优于阅读或听讲的直觉推动了对沉浸式教育技术的连续投资浪潮。当前时刻的与众不同之处在于几个因素的交汇：VR硬件成本的大幅下降、软件开发工具的成熟、新冠疫情对技术中介学习的常态化，以及中国政府和欧盟作为主要机构参与者进入沉浸式教育技术部署领域。
The global VR in education market reflects this convergence. Valued at USD 14.55 billion in 2023, it is projected to grow to USD 65.55 billion by 2032, representing a compound annual growth rate of 18.2 percent (Fortune Business Insights 2024). The Asia Pacific region is the fastest-growing market, with a projected CAGR of 22.01 percent, driven primarily by Chinese government investment in virtual simulation infrastructure (Mordor Intelligence 2025).	全球教育VR市场反映了这种交汇。2023年价值145.5亿美元，预计到2032年增长至655.5亿美元，复合年增长率为18.2%（Fortune Business Insights 2024）。亚太地区是增长最快的市场，预计年复合增长率为22.01%，主要由中国政府对虚拟仿真基础设施的投资驱动（Mordor Intelligence 2025）。
Yet market growth does not automatically translate into educational effectiveness. The history of educational technology is littered with innovations that promised transformation but delivered incremental improvement — or none at all. From the language laboratory of the 1960s to the MOOCs of the 2010s, each wave of educational technology has followed a predictable cycle: enthusiastic adoption driven by techno-optimistic claims, followed by empirical evaluation revealing modest effects, followed by a more measured integration into existing pedagogical practice. VR in education appears to be entering the evaluation phase of this cycle, making this an opportune moment for a comparative assessment.	然而，市场增长并不自动转化为教育效果。教育技术的历史充满了承诺变革但仅带来渐进改进——或根本没有改进——的创新。从1960年代的语言实验室到2010年代的MOOC，每一波教育技术浪潮都遵循着可预测的周期：由技术乐观主义驱动的热情采纳，随后是揭示效果温和的实证评估，再后是更为审慎地融入现有教学实践。教育领域的VR似乎正在进入这一周期的评估阶段，这使得当前时机尤为适合开展比较评估。
This article examines the evidence for VR’s pedagogical impact, compares Chinese and European deployment strategies, and assesses the challenges — cost, equity, pedagogy, and health — that both systems must address. Our analysis draws on systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and case studies from both contexts, aiming to move beyond promotional claims toward an evidence-based assessment of what immersive technologies can and cannot contribute to higher education. We organize our analysis around five questions: What VR infrastructure has each system built? What does the evidence say about learning effectiveness? How do the two systems compare in their deployment strategies? What challenges must both address? And what does the future hold — particularly the emerging concept of the Edu-Metaverse?	本文考察了VR教学影响的证据，比较了中欧的部署策略，并评估了两个体系都必须应对的挑战——成本、公平、教学法和健康。我们的分析借鉴了两种情境的系统综述、荟萃分析和案例研究，旨在超越宣传性的主张，走向对沉浸式技术能够和不能为高等教育贡献什么的循证评估。我们围绕五个问题组织分析：各自的体系建设了什么VR基础设施？关于学习有效性的证据如何？两个体系的部署策略有何异同？两者都必须应对什么挑战？未来将如何发展——特别是新兴的教育元宇宙概念？
2. VR in Chinese Universities: Scale and Speed	2. 中国大学中的VR：规模与速度
2.1 The National Virtual Simulation Infrastructure	2.1 国家虚拟仿真基础设施
China‘s approach to VR in education reflects the centralized, state-led model that characterizes its broader digital education strategy. In 2018, the Ministry of Education initiated the National Virtual Simulation Experimental Teaching Project, establishing virtual simulation as a formal category of educational infrastructure alongside traditional laboratories. The 2021 Construction Guidelines for Demonstrative Virtual Simulation Training Bases in Vocational Education set a target of approximately 200 bases; by 2024, 215 had been developed, exceeding the original plan (Ministry of Education 2021).	中国对教育中VR的方法反映了其更广泛数字教育战略中集中化、国家主导的模式。2018年，教育部启动了国家虚拟仿真实验教学项目，将虚拟仿真确立为与传统实验室并列的正式教育基础设施类别。2021年《职业教育示范性虚拟仿真实训基地建设指南》设定了约200个基地的目标；到2024年，已建成215个，超出了原定计划（教育部 2021）。
The flagship platform is iLAB-X, which by December 2022 had integrated laboratories from 2,672 domestic universities with over 13 million participants. The platform hosts 480 virtual simulation experiment courses, of which national and provincial high-quality courses account for 33.5 percent and 35.8 percent respectively (Zhu et al. 2023). Medical education has been a particular focus, reflecting the practical constraint that clinical training requires access to patients and equipment that cannot be scaled through traditional means.	旗舰平台iLAB-X到2022年12月已整合了来自2,672所国内大学的实验室，参与者超过1,300万。该平台托管480门虚拟仿真实验课程，其中国家级和省级精品课程分别占33.5%和35.8%（Zhu等人 2023）。医学教育一直是特别重点，反映了临床培训需要接触患者和设备这一无法通过传统方式扩展的实际约束。
Zhuang, Xu, and Zhang (2025), in a study published in Springer’s Virtual Reality journal, present three case studies from Chinese universities — in telecommunications, civil, and chemical engineering — demonstrating how VR contextualizes abstract theoretical knowledge through simulated environments. The studies show that VR enables situated learning experiences that would be impossible, dangerous, or prohibitively expensive in physical laboratories: students can observe molecular structures from the inside, simulate structural failures without risk, and practice chemical processes without handling hazardous materials.	Zhuang、Xu和Zhang（2025）在Springer旗下《Virtual Reality》期刊发表的研究中，以中国三所大学——电信、土木和化学工程专业——为案例，展示了VR如何通过模拟环境将抽象理论知识情境化。研究表明，VR实现了物理实验室中不可能、危险或成本过高的情境化学习体验：学生可以从内部观察分子结构，在无风险的情况下模拟结构失效，以及在不接触危险材料的情况下练习化学工艺流程。
The „Golden Course“ initiative, proposed by the Ministry of Education in 2018 as one of five course types for quality improvement, has further institutionalized virtual simulation. Wang and colleagues (2023) document the Green Logistics Virtual Simulation Experiment as a case study, demonstrating how virtual simulation addresses practical training limitations including high costs, safety risks, and limited access to real-world logistics facilities.	"金课"举措——教育部2018年提出的五种课程类型之一，旨在提升课程质量——进一步推动了虚拟仿真的制度化。Wang等人（2023）以绿色物流虚拟仿真实验为案例，展示了虚拟仿真如何解决实训中的局限，包括高成本、安全风险和真实物流设施接入受限等问题。
2.2 The Emerging Edu-Metaverse	2.2 新兴的教育元宇宙
Chinese institutions have moved beyond standalone VR applications toward a more comprehensive vision: the Edu-Metaverse. A 2025 study in Interactive Learning Environments proposes a three-layered Edu-Metaverse ecosystem model — hardware, software, and application layers — within a socio-ecological context, reviewing China‘s Edu-Metaverse development across seven aspects. Zhang and colleagues (2022), in an earlier IEEE publication, identified the key technological enablers — digital twins, 5G networks, and AI — for integrating teachers, learners, resources, and teaching environments into a unified immersive ecosystem.	中国机构已超越独立的VR应用，走向更全面的愿景：教育元宇宙。2025年发表于《Interactive Learning Environments》的一项研究提出了三层教育元宇宙生态系统模型——硬件层、软件层和应用层——置于社会生态语境中，从七个方面回顾了中国教育元宇宙的发展。Zhang等人（2022）在更早的IEEE出版物中，识别了关键技术使能要素——数字孪生、5G网络和AI——用于将教师、学习者、资源和教学环境整合到统一的沉浸式生态系统中。
Gray (2025), in an analysis of China‘s national policy agenda for extended reality, documents the strategic importance that Chinese policymakers attach to XR development. The metaverse is not merely an educational experiment but a component of China’s broader technology strategy, with implications for industrial training, cultural heritage preservation, and international soft power.	Gray（2025）在对中国扩展现实（XR）国家政策议程的分析中，记录了中国政策制定者赋予XR发展的战略重要性。元宇宙不仅仅是一项教育实验，还是中国更广泛技术战略的组成部分，对工业培训、文化遗产保护和国际软实力都有深远影响。
2.3 The Smart Education Platform	2.3 智慧教育平台
China‘s most recognized achievement in digital education is the National Smart Education Platform, which won the 2022 UNESCO King Hamad Bin Isa Al-Khalifa Prize for ICT in Education. Launched on 28 March 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the platform covers basic, vocational, and higher education, with 13.15 million registered users, 27,000 MOOCs for higher education, and training for over 10 million teachers (UNESCO 2023). During the first quarter of 2020 alone, over 950,000 teachers from 1,454 universities taught 942,000 online courses, attracting 1.18 billion student registrations (Xiong et al. 2021).	中国在数字教育方面最受认可的成就是国家智慧教育平台，荣获2022年联合国教科文组织哈马德·本·伊萨·阿勒哈利法国王信息通信技术教育奖。该平台于2020年3月28日推出以应对新冠疫情，涵盖基础教育、职业教育和高等教育，拥有1,315万注册用户、27,000门高等教育MOOC，并培训了超过1,000万教师（UNESCO 2023）。仅在2020年第一季度，来自1,454所大学的95万余名教师就讲授了942,000门在线课程，吸引了11.8亿人次学生注册（Xiong等人 2021）。
The platform’s smart classroom component has been the subject of empirical research on learning outcomes. A 2026 study in Acta Psychologica examines the relationship between physical immersive smart-classroom environments and technology-enhanced academic performance among Chinese undergraduates, finding that smart-classroom environments directly predict academic performance and that teacher-directed AI scaffolding boosts the relationship between learning enjoyment and performance outcomes.	该平台的智慧课堂组件已成为学习成果实证研究的对象。2026年发表于《Acta Psychologica》的一项研究考察了物理沉浸式智慧课堂环境与中国本科生技术增强型学业表现之间的关系，发现智慧课堂环境直接预测学业表现，教师引导的人工智能支架效应增强了学习愉悦与绩效结果之间的关系（Zhang, C. 2026）。
3. VR in European Universities: Distributed Innovation	3. 欧洲大学中的VR：分布式创新
3.1 EU-Funded Projects	3.1 欧盟资助项目
The European approach to VR in education is characteristically distributed, operating through competitive funding mechanisms rather than centralized mandates. The Digital Education Action Plan 2021–2027 provides the strategic framework, with immersive technologies identified as part of the broader digital education strategy. The EU’s 2025 report on Virtual Worlds and health and well-being documents that VR transforms education through increased emotional and cognitive engagement, while identifying challenges including cybersickness, eye strain, and accessibility concerns (European Commission 2025).	欧洲对教育中VR的方法具有典型的分布式特征，通过竞争性资助机制而非集中式指令运作。《数字教育行动计划2021–2027》提供了战略框架，将沉浸式技术纳入更广泛的数字教育战略。欧盟2025年关于虚拟世界与健康福祉的报告记录了VR通过增强情感和认知参与来改变教育的方式，同时也指出了网络眩晕、视觉疲劳和可及性等方面的挑战（European Commission 2025）。
Several EU-funded projects illustrate the European approach. The VR-intense project (Erasmus+, launched September 2024, EUR 400,000) at Paderborn University develops inclusive VR environments for higher education, with specific attention to accessibility for students with disabilities (Beutner and Schneider 2024). The VReduMED project (Interreg Central Europe) brings together institutions from the Czech Republic, Austria, Slovakia, Hungary, and Germany to develop VR applications for nursing and medical education. The XR4ED platform (Horizon-funded) enables educators to build XR teaching experiences without programming or 3D modeling expertise, including a marketplace for 3D models, avatars, and collaborative VR channels (Liarokapis et al. 2024).	多个欧盟资助项目体现了欧洲的方法。帕德博恩大学的VR-intense项目（Erasmus+，2024年9月启动，40万欧元）开发面向高等教育的包容性VR环境，特别关注残障学生的可及性（Beutner和Schneider 2024）。VReduMED项目（Interreg中欧）汇集了捷克、奥地利、斯洛伐克、匈牙利和德国的机构，合作开发护理和医学教育VR应用。XR4ED平台（"地平线"资助）使教育者无需编程或3D建模专业知识即可构建XR教学体验，包含一个3D模型、虚拟形象和协作VR频道的市场（Liarokapis等人 2024）。
These projects reflect the EU’s emphasis on transnational collaboration, accessibility, and pedagogical innovation. Unlike China‘s centralized platform approach, European VR in education emerges from a competitive ecosystem of research groups, technology companies, and educational institutions, each pursuing distinct approaches within a common strategic framework.	这些项目反映了欧盟对跨国合作、可及性和教学创新的重视。与中国的集中式平台方法不同，欧洲教育VR源自研究团队、技术公司和教育机构的竞争性生态系统，各方在共同战略框架内追求不同的路径。
The scale difference is significant. While China‘s iLAB-X integrates 2,672 universities on a single platform, no European initiative approaches this scope. The EU’s strength lies in the quality and rigor of individual projects rather than system-wide deployment — a pattern consistent with the broader comparison of European and Chinese approaches to digital education documented throughout this anthology.	规模差异是显著的。中国的iLAB-X在单一平台上整合了2,672所大学，而没有任何欧洲倡议接近这种规模。欧盟的优势在于单个项目的质量和严谨性，而非全系统部署——这一模式与本论文集中所记录的中欧数字教育比较的更广泛格局一致。
3.2 Evidence of Effectiveness	3.2 有效性证据
The European research community has produced substantial evidence on VR’s pedagogical effectiveness. A systematic review published in Computers and Education (2024) analyzed 71 comparative studies of virtual versus traditional learning in higher education. The review found that 67 percent used quantitative methods, over half involved undergraduates (61 percent), and most focused on STEM disciplines, particularly health sciences (45 percent). VR solutions were predominantly immersive (63 percent), interactive (59 percent), and single-user (92 percent). A critical finding was that interactivity — not immersiveness — emerged as the crucial success factor: VR applications that allowed students to manipulate objects and make decisions outperformed those that merely presented immersive visual environments.	欧洲研究界已产出了大量关于VR教学有效性的证据。2024年发表于《Computers and Education》的系统综述分析了71项虚拟与传统高等教育学习的比较研究。该综述发现，67%采用定量方法，超过一半涉及本科生（61%），大多数聚焦于STEM学科，尤其是健康科学（45%）。VR方案以沉浸式（63%）、交互式（59%）和单用户（92%）为主。一项关键发现是：交互性——而非沉浸感——是关键的成功因素：允许学生操控对象和做出决策的VR应用优于仅呈现沉浸式视觉环境的应用。
Han and colleagues (2025), in a meta-analysis of 52 empirical studies on VR in teacher education, report a positive moderate overall effect with a Hedges’ g of 0.524, with significant variations based on immersion level, equipment type, and learning objectives. Yang and colleagues (2024), in a meta-analysis of VR’s impact on practical skills in science and engineering education, analyzed 37 studies and found a significant moderate positive effect (g = 0.477), with medical students showing the largest improvement.	Han等人（2025）在对52项VR师范教育实证研究的荟萃分析中，报告了中等正向的总体效应，Hedges' g = 0.524，沉浸程度、设备类型和学习目标导致显著差异。Yang等人（2024）在对VR在科学与工程教育中对实践技能影响的荟萃分析中，分析了37项研究，发现了显著的中等正向效应（g = 0.477），其中医学生的改进最大。
Cabrera-Duffaut, Pinto-Llorente, and Iglesias-Rodriguez (2024) argue that VR’s value extends beyond knowledge transfer to competency development — the capacity to apply knowledge in practical contexts. Their systematic review finds that VR facilitates the development of procedural skills, spatial reasoning, and collaborative problem-solving in ways that traditional instruction cannot replicate. However, they also document persistent challenges: high costs of VR technology, lack of specialized educational software, and limited accessibility for institutions with constrained budgets.	Cabrera-Duffaut、Pinto-Llorente和Iglesias-Rodriguez（2024）指出，VR的价值超越了知识传递，延伸到能力发展——在实际情境中应用知识的能力。他们的系统综述发现，VR以传统教学无法复制的方式促进了程序性技能、空间推理和协作式问题解决的发展。然而，他们也记录了持续存在的挑战：VR技术的高成本、专业教育软件的缺乏以及预算有限的机构面临的可及性受限。
4. Comparative Analysis: China-Europe Differences	4. 比较分析：中欧差异
4.1 Institutional Architecture	4.1 制度架构
The most fundamental difference between Chinese and European VR deployment lies in institutional architecture. China‘s top-down approach enables rapid scaling: the transition from policy announcement to 215 virtual simulation training bases took approximately three years. The iLAB-X platform’s integration of 2,672 universities on a single infrastructure would be logistically impossible in the EU’s decentralized system. Xu and colleagues (2024), in a study of Chinese college students’ willingness to continue using virtual simulation learning systems, find that perceived value and teacher recommendations significantly influence adoption — suggesting that institutional mandates and pedagogical integration are mutually reinforcing.	中欧VR部署最根本的差异在于制度架构。中国的自上而下方法实现了快速规模化：从政策宣布到215个虚拟仿真实训基地的建成大约只用了三年。iLAB-X平台在单一基础设施上整合2,672所大学的做法在欧盟分散化的体系中从后勤上来说是不可能的。Xu等人（2024）在对中国大学生持续使用虚拟仿真学习系统意愿的研究中发现，感知价值和教师推荐显著影响采纳——这表明制度性指令与教学整合是相互强化的。
Europe’s distributed approach, by contrast, generates diversity and innovation but at slower scale. The multiplicity of EU-funded projects — each with distinct objectives, partners, and methodologies — creates a rich experimental landscape but also fragmentation. There is no European equivalent of iLAB-X: a single platform integrating virtual simulation resources across hundreds of institutions.	相比之下，欧洲的分布式方法产生了多样性和创新，但规模扩展较慢。众多欧盟资助项目——各有不同的目标、合作伙伴和方法论——创造了丰富的实验景观，但也带来了碎片化。欧洲没有iLAB-X的对等物：一个整合数百所机构虚拟仿真资源的统一平台。
4.2 Disciplinary Focus	4.2 跨文化比较：中国-西班牙研究
Both systems concentrate VR deployment in disciplines where the pedagogical case is strongest. Medical and health sciences education is the leading domain in both contexts, reflecting the universal constraint that clinical training requires access to patients, equipment, and procedures that cannot be scaled through traditional means. Engineering and natural sciences follow closely, with VR enabling visualization of processes that are invisible (molecular structures), dangerous (chemical reactions), or impossible to replicate in physical laboratories (geological formations, astronomical phenomena).	Fernandez-Batanero等人（2023）发表于《Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence》的中国-西班牙比较研究提供了最直接的跨文化证据。该研究对每所大学20名教师进行调查，发现两国的元宇宙使用都处于初始实验阶段，中国受访者对其连接国际学生的潜力表现出更大的乐观（100%认同），西班牙同行为90%认同。教职培训和设施在两种情境下都有限——这一发现表明VR采纳的障碍与其说是技术性的，不如说是人的因素和组织层面的。
4.2 Cross-Cultural Comparison: The China-Spain Study	该研究揭示了一种耐人寻味的不对称性：中国大学在VR基础设施方面投资更多，但中西两国教师对教学最佳实践的不确定感水平相当。换言之，硬件部署在两种情境下都超前于教学法发展，尽管规模不同。这一发现与数字素养章节（Woesler，本卷）中记录的更广泛模式相呼应：基础设施投资并不自动转化为教育效果。
The China-Spain comparison by Fernandez-Batanero and colleagues (2023), published in Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, provides the most direct cross-cultural evidence available. Surveying 20 teachers per university, the study finds that metaverse use in both countries is in an initial experimentation phase, with Chinese respondents showing greater optimism about its potential for international student connection (100 percent agreement) compared to their Spanish counterparts (90 percent agreement). Faculty training and facilities remain limited in both contexts — a finding that suggests the barriers to VR adoption are as much human and organizational as they are technological.	4.3 学科重点
The study reveals a telling asymmetry: Chinese universities have invested more in VR infrastructure, but Chinese and Spanish faculty report similar levels of uncertainty about pedagogical best practices. Hardware deployment, in other words, has outpaced pedagogical development in both contexts, though at different scales. This finding resonates with the broader pattern documented in the digital literacy chapter (Woesler, this volume): infrastructure investment does not automatically translate into educational effectiveness.	两个体系都将VR部署集中在教学论证最为充分的学科领域。医学与健康科学教育在两种情境中都是首要领域，反映了临床培训需要接触患者、设备和操作程序这一无法通过传统方式扩展的普遍约束。Zhu等人（2023）对iLAB-X平台的分析证实，医学虚拟仿真是最大的单一课程类别，截至2022年12月已建设480门课程。
4.3 Disciplinary Focus	工程和自然科学紧随其后，VR使不可见的（分子结构）、危险的（化学反应）或物理实验室中无法复制的（地质构造、天文现象）过程得以可视化。人文和社会科学在VR教育中的代表性仍然不足，这既反映了模拟诠释性和话语性学习活动的困难，也反映了这些学科传统上技术密集度较低的学科文化。
Both systems concentrate VR deployment in disciplines where the pedagogical case is strongest. Medical and health sciences education is the leading domain in both contexts, reflecting the universal constraint that clinical training requires access to patients, equipment, and procedures that cannot be scaled through traditional means. Zhu and colleagues’ (2023) analysis of the iLAB-X platform confirms that medical virtual simulation constitutes the largest single category of courses, with 480 courses constructed by December 2022.	4.4 学习成果：证据显示了什么
Engineering and natural sciences follow closely, with VR enabling visualization of processes that are invisible (molecular structures), dangerous (chemical reactions), or impossible to replicate in physical laboratories (geological formations, astronomical phenomena). The humanities and social sciences remain underrepresented in VR education, reflecting both the difficulty of simulating interpretive and discursive learning activities and the disciplinary culture of fields that have historically been less technology-intensive.	荟萃分析证据表明VR的有效性一贯积极但温和。Han等人（2025）关于师范教育的荟萃分析报告Hedges' g = 0.524；Yang等人（2024）关于STEM实践技能的荟萃分析报告g = 0.477。这些是有意义的效应量——大致相当于将学生从第50百分位提升到第70百分位——但不足以证明有时对教育中VR所提出的变革性主张。
4.4 Learning Outcomes: What the Evidence Shows	关键的是，效应量受多个因素调节。沉浸程度、设备类型和学习目标都会影响结果。交互式VR应用一贯优于被动式应用。短时、聚焦、整合到更广泛教学序列中的VR体验优于作为独立教学使用的延长VR会话。教学设计的质量——VR活动与学习目标和评估的一致性——比VR环境本身的技术复杂程度更为重要。
The meta-analytic evidence for VR’s effectiveness is consistently positive but moderate. Han and colleagues’ (2025) meta-analysis of teacher education reports Hedges’ g = 0.524; Yang and colleagues’ (2024) meta-analysis of practical skills in STEM reports g = 0.477. These are meaningful effect sizes — roughly equivalent to moving a student from the 50th to the 70th percentile — but they do not justify the transformative claims sometimes made for VR in education.	5. 挑战：成本、公平、教学法与健康
Critically, the effect sizes are moderated by several factors. Immersion level, equipment type, and learning objectives all influence outcomes. Interactive VR applications consistently outperform passive ones. Short, focused VR experiences integrated into broader pedagogical sequences outperform extended VR sessions used as standalone instruction. And the quality of pedagogical design — the alignment of VR activities with learning objectives and assessment — matters more than the technical sophistication of the VR environment itself.	5.1 基础设施成本与公平问题
5. Challenges: Cost, Equity, Pedagogy, and Health	教育领域的VR部署带来显著成本。行业估计表明，为20–25名学生的中型大学教室建立VR实验室需要投资20,000至80,000美元，具体取决于硬件、软件模块和基础设施（IXR Labs 2025）。一个完整的元大学数字孪生校园平均约需50,000美元。这些成本对于资源丰富的机构是可控的，但对许多机构来说是禁止性的，造成VR可能扩大而非缩小教育不平等的风险。
5.1 Infrastructure Costs and the Equity Question	在中国，政府的集中投资减轻了国家体系内机构的这一风险，但农村和较小的机构可能仍然缺乏有效使用VR所需的技术支持和教学专业知识。在欧洲，《2025年数字十年状况》报告中记录的成员国间数字基础设施差异（参见本卷数字原住民章节）意味着VR部署集中在较富裕的成员国和机构中，可能加剧DigComp 2.2旨在解决的数字鸿沟。
VR deployment in education carries significant costs. Industry estimates suggest that a VR lab for a mid-sized college classroom of 20–25 students requires an investment of USD 20,000 to USD 80,000, depending on hardware, software modules, and infrastructure (IXR Labs 2025). A full metaversity digital twin campus averages approximately USD 50,000. These costs are manageable for well-resourced institutions but prohibitive for many, creating the risk that VR will widen rather than narrow educational inequalities.	5.2 教学有效性：超越炒作
In China, the government’s centralized investment mitigates this risk for institutions within the national system, but rural and smaller institutions may still lack the technical support and pedagogical expertise needed to use VR effectively. In Europe, the inter-state variation in digital infrastructure documented in the State of the Digital Decade 2025 report (see Digital Natives chapter, this volume) means that VR deployment is concentrated in wealthier member states and institutions, potentially exacerbating the digital divide that DigComp 2.2 was designed to address.	本文审阅的证据支持VR对学习成果的中等正向效应（Hedges' g = 0.477–0.524），但该效应既非普遍也非无条件。71项研究的系统综述将交互性确定为关键成功因素：仅呈现沉浸式视觉效果的被动式VR体验在统计上并不显著优于传统教学。这一发现对VR采购和课程设计具有重要启示：投资VR硬件而未相应投资于交互式软件设计和教学整合的机构，不太可能看到有意义的学习收益。
5.2 Pedagogical Effectiveness: Beyond the Hype	Makela、Harley和MacArthur（2025）在CHI 2025上发表的关于大学设计课程大规模VR部署（30副头盔、55名学生、12周）的研究中，报告了高度积极的学生参与度，但也记录了课堂规模VR的实际挑战：教师必须适应VR内授课，需要安全措施防止学生碰撞家具，并且必须积极管理网络眩晕。
The evidence reviewed in this article supports a moderate positive effect of VR on learning outcomes (Hedges’ g = 0.477–0.524), but the effect is neither universal nor unconditional. The systematic review of 71 studies identified interactivity as the crucial success factor: passive VR experiences that merely present immersive visuals do not outperform traditional instruction in a statistically significant way. This finding has important implications for VR procurement and curriculum design: institutions that invest in VR hardware without corresponding investment in interactive software design and pedagogical integration are unlikely to see meaningful learning gains.	被广泛引用的说法——VR培训的学习者一年后保留80%的材料，而传统教学仅为20%——值得审视。普华永道（PwC 2022）的研究——关于VR培训有效性最常被引用的来源——衡量的是完成速度（比课堂快4倍）、情感联结（与内容的联结感强3.75倍）和信心（应用技能的准备度高275%）。具体的记忆保持数据出现在衍生的行业来源中而非PwC研究本身，应被视为指示性而非决定性的。
Makela, Harley, and MacArthur (2025), in a CHI 2025 study of large-scale VR deployment in a university design class (30 headsets, 55 students, 12 weeks), report highly positive student engagement but also document the practical challenges of classroom-scale VR: instructors must adapt to in-VR lecturing, safety measures are needed to prevent students from colliding with furniture, and cybersickness must be actively managed.	5.3 健康与福祉
The widely cited claim that VR-trained learners retain 80 percent of material after one year compared to 20 percent for traditional instruction warrants scrutiny. The PwC (2022) study, which is the most frequently cited source for VR training effectiveness, measured speed of completion (4 times faster than classroom), emotional connection (3.75 times more connected to content), and confidence (275 percent more ready to apply skills). The specific retention figures appear in derivative industry sources rather than the PwC study itself and should be treated as indicative rather than definitive.	VR使用的生理效应构成持续性挑战。网络眩晕——由沉浸式环境中视觉-前庭冲突引发的运动病形式——影响相当比例的用户，症状包括恶心、迷失方向和头痛。欧盟委员会2025年关于虚拟世界与健康的报告明确将网络眩晕和视觉疲劳列为需要管控的关切。Soltani和Rostami（2025）在ACM的一项研究中记录，VR系统受到高成本、包括网络眩晕在内的可用性问题以及可能对学习质量产生负面影响的显著认知负荷的制约。
5.3 Health and Wellbeing	这些健康关切对教育场景中的长时VR使用尤为相关。大多数研究建议将连续VR使用限制在20–30分钟内，这限制了可通过VR有效实施的教育活动类型。其启示是，VR最好作为传统教学的补充——用于体验维度在教学上至关重要的特定、高价值活动——而非作为课堂教学的全面替代。
The physiological effects of VR use present a persistent challenge. Cybersickness — a form of motion sickness triggered by visual-vestibular conflict in immersive environments — affects a significant proportion of users, with symptoms including nausea, disorientation, and headache. The European Commission’s 2025 report on Virtual Worlds and health specifically identifies cybersickness and eye strain as concerns requiring management. Soltani and Rostami (2025), in an ACM study, document that VR systems are constrained by high costs, usability issues including cybersickness, and significant cognitive demands that can negatively impact learning quality.	5.4 教师培训差距
These health concerns are particularly relevant for extended VR sessions in educational settings. Most studies recommend limiting continuous VR use to 20–30 minutes, which constrains the types of educational activities that can be effectively delivered through VR. The implication is that VR is best deployed as a complement to traditional instruction — for specific, high-value activities where the experiential dimension is pedagogically essential — rather than as a wholesale replacement for classroom teaching.	中欧研究中一个持续存在的发现是VR技术可用性与教师准备度之间的差距。Fernandez-Batanero等人（2023）的研究记录了中国和西班牙教师培训的不足。Xu、Zou和Zhou（2024）发现教师推荐显著影响中国学生使用VR的意愿——这意味着对VR教学价值心存疑虑的教师会将这种不确定性传递给学生。VReduMED项目对"培训培训者"工作坊的重视反映了欧洲的认识：没有教师准备的技术部署是浪费投资。
5.4 The Teacher Training Gap	这一发现与本论文集相关章节中记录的更广泛AI素养挑战相呼应：硬件、软件或内容都不能单独决定教育成果。人的要素——教师专业能力、教学设计、机构支持——仍然是关键变量。
A persistent finding across both Chinese and European studies is the gap between VR technology availability and teacher preparedness. The Fernandez-Batanero et al. (2023) study documents limited faculty training in both China and Spain. Xu, Zou, and Zhou (2024) find that teacher recommendations significantly influence Chinese students’ willingness to use VR — implying that teachers who are uncertain about VR’s pedagogical value transmit that uncertainty to students. The VReduMED project’s emphasis on Train-the-Trainer workshops reflects the European recognition that technology deployment without teacher preparation is investment wasted.	6. 结论
This finding connects to the broader AI literacy challenge documented in the companion chapters: neither hardware nor software nor content alone determines educational outcomes. The human element — teacher expertise, pedagogical design, institutional support — remains the critical variable.	中欧教育VR方法的比较揭示了贯穿本论文集主题的特征性模式：中国通过集中投资和机构指令以规模和速度进行部署；欧洲通过分布式竞争性资助进行创新，并产出关于效果的严谨证据。中国的215个虚拟仿真实训基地、服务1,300万参与者的iLAB-X平台以及获联合国教科文组织认可的智慧教育平台展示了集中协调所能取得的成就。欧洲的系统综述、荟萃分析和教学创新项目展示了循证发展以及关注公平、可及性和健康的价值。
6. Conclusion	两种方法单独都不够充分。如果VR的部署缺乏证据所指出的交互式教学设计这一关键成功因素，中国的规模优势就会被削弱。如果系统综述和荟萃分析的洞见仅停留在研究出版物中而未指导大规模部署，欧洲的证据优势也会被削弱。最有前景的前进道路将中国的规模与欧洲的严谨相结合：在基础设施层面部署VR，同时确保每次部署都基于关于什么有效、对谁有效以及在什么条件下有效的证据。
The comparison of Chinese and European approaches to VR in education reveals a characteristic pattern that recurs across the themes of this anthology: China deploys at scale and speed through centralized investment and institutional mandates; Europe innovates through distributed, competitive funding and produces rigorous evidence of effectiveness. China’s 215 virtual simulation training bases, the iLAB-X platform serving 13 million participants, and the UNESCO-recognized Smart Education Platform demonstrate what centralized coordination can achieve. Europe’s systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and pedagogically innovative projects demonstrate the value of evidence-based development and attention to equity, accessibility, and health.	从这一比较中得出了几项实用建议。第一，VR投资应先于教学需求评估：哪些学习目标真正需要沉浸式、体验式参与，哪些可以通过成本更低的方式更好地实现？第二，教师培训必须伴随——最好先于——硬件部署。第三，VR应作为传统教学的补充而非替代来部署：证据支持将短时、聚焦、交互式VR活动整合到更广泛的教学序列中。第四，公平性考量必须居于核心地位：如果VR扩大了资源丰富与资源匮乏机构之间的差距，其对教育质量的净贡献将是负面的。第五，健康监测应成为标准做法：网络眩晕筛查、会话时长限制和定期休息是必不可少的保障措施。
Neither approach is sufficient alone. China‘s scale advantage is undermined if VR is deployed without the interactive pedagogical design that the evidence identifies as the critical success factor. Europe’s evidence advantage is undermined if the insights from systematic reviews and meta-analyses remain confined to research publications rather than informing large-scale deployment. The most promising path forward combines Chinese scale with European rigor: deploying VR at the infrastructure level while ensuring that each deployment is grounded in evidence about what works, for whom, and under what conditions.	新兴的教育元宇宙概念既代表了最大的机遇也代表了最大的风险。如果教育中的元宇宙意味着创造真正交互式、协作性的学习环境——超越物理空间和地理的限制——例如使一名中国工程学生和一名德国同行能够合作进行虚拟桥梁设计——那么这项投资是值得的。如果它意味着用技术上令人印象深刻但教学上浅薄的体验取代有效的教学法，那么这项投资就是浪费。本文审阅的证据表明，这两种结果之间的差异不在于技术本身，而在于部署技术时的教学意向性——这一发现直接关联到本卷关于AI伦理、数字素养和未来大学的相关章节（Woesler，本卷）。
Several practical recommendations emerge from this comparison. First, VR investment should be preceded by pedagogical needs assessment: which learning objectives genuinely require immersive, experiential engagement, and which are better served by less costly means? Second, teacher training must accompany — and ideally precede — hardware deployment. Third, VR should be deployed as a complement to traditional instruction, not a replacement: the evidence supports short, focused, interactive VR activities integrated into broader pedagogical sequences. Fourth, equity considerations must be central: if VR widens the gap between well-resourced and under-resourced institutions, its net contribution to educational quality is negative. Fifth, health monitoring should be standard practice: cybersickness screening, session duration limits, and regular breaks are essential safeguards.	致谢
The emerging Edu-Metaverse concept represents both the greatest opportunity and the greatest risk. If the metaverse in education means creating genuinely interactive, collaborative learning environments that transcend the limitations of physical space and geography — enabling a Chinese engineering student and a German counterpart to collaborate on a virtual bridge design, for instance — then the investment is justified. If it means replacing effective pedagogies with technologically impressive but pedagogically shallow experiences, the investment is wasted. The evidence reviewed in this article suggests that the difference between these outcomes lies not in the technology itself but in the pedagogical intentionality with which it is deployed — a finding that connects directly to the companion chapters on AI ethics, digital literacy, and the university of the future (Woesler, this volume).	本研究在让·莫内卓越中心"EUSC-DEC"（欧盟资助 101126782，2023–2026年）框架内进行。作者感谢第四研究组（教育中的技术与创新）成员对比较分析的贡献。
Acknowledgments	参考文献
This research was conducted within the framework of the Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence „EUSC-DEC“ (EU Grant 101126782, 2023–2026). The author thanks the members of Research Group 4 (Technology and Innovation in Education) for their contributions to the comparative analysis.	Beutner, M. & Schneider, J. (2024). VR-intense — Virtual Reality innovation tool for encouraging new students in environments for higher education lectures and seminars. Erasmus+ Project, Paderborn University.
References	Cabrera-Duffaut, A., Pinto-Llorente, A. M. & Iglesias-Rodriguez, A. (2024). Immersive learning platforms: Analyzing virtual reality contribution to competence development in higher education — A systematic literature review. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1391560.
Beutner, M. & Schneider, J. (2024). VR-intense — Virtual Reality innovation tool for encouraging new students in environments for higher education lectures and seminars. Erasmus+ Project, Paderborn University.	European Commission. (2025). Virtual Worlds: How Do They Affect Our Health and Well-Being? Published July 2025.
Cabrera-Duffaut, A., Pinto-Llorente, A. M. & Iglesias-Rodriguez, A. (2024). Immersive learning platforms: Analyzing virtual reality contribution to competence development in higher education — A systematic literature review. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1391560. DOI: 10.3389/feduc.2024.1391560	Fernandez-Batanero, J. M., Huang, R. et al. (2023). Perceptions and use of metaverse in higher education: A descriptive study in China and Spain. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 5, 100185.
European Commission. (2025). Virtual Worlds: How Do They Affect Our Health and Well-Being? Published July 2025.	Fortune Business Insights. (2024). Virtual Reality in Education Market Size, Share and Industry Analysis. Report ID: FBI101696.
Fernandez-Batanero, J. M., Huang, R. et al. (2023). Perceptions and use of metaverse in higher education: A descriptive study in China and Spain. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 5, 100185. DOI: 10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100185	Gray, J. (2025). The Chinese metaverse: An analysis of China's policy agenda for extended reality (XR). Policy and Internet.
Fortune Business Insights. (2024). Virtual Reality in Education Market Size, Share and Industry Analysis. Report ID: FBI101696.	Han, X., Luo, H., Wang, Z. & Zhang, D. (2025). Using virtual reality for teacher education: A systematic review and meta-analysis of literature from 2014 to 2024. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 6, 1620905.
Gray, J. (2025). The Chinese metaverse: An analysis of China‘s policy agenda for extended reality (XR). Policy and Internet. DOI: 10.1002/poi3.418	IXR Labs. (2025). Cost of VR Lab Setup: A Budget Guide for Universities and Colleges.
Han, X., Luo, H., Wang, Z. & Zhang, D. (2025). Using virtual reality for teacher education: A systematic review and meta-analysis of literature from 2014 to 2024. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 6, 1620905. DOI: 10.3389/frvir.2025.1620905	Liarokapis, F. et al. (2024). XR4ED: An extended reality platform for education. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 44(4), 79–88.
IXR Labs. (2025). Cost of VR Lab Setup: A Budget Guide for Universities and Colleges.	Makela, V., Harley, D. & MacArthur, C. (2025). Integrating virtual reality head-mounted displays into higher education classrooms on a large scale. Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
Liarokapis, F. et al. (2024). XR4ED: An extended reality platform for education. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 44(4), 79–88. DOI: 10.1109/MCG.2024.3406139	Ministry of Education of China. (2021). Construction Guidelines for Demonstrative Virtual Simulation Training Bases in Vocational Education.
Makela, V., Harley, D. & MacArthur, C. (2025). Integrating virtual reality head-mounted displays into higher education classrooms on a large scale. Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. DOI: 10.1145/3706598.3713690	Mordor Intelligence. (2025). Virtual Reality (VR) in Education Market Analysis — Industry Trends, Size and Forecast Report.
Ministry of Education of China. (2021). Construction Guidelines for Demonstrative Virtual Simulation Training Bases in Vocational Education.	PwC. (2022). What does virtual reality and the metaverse mean for training? PwC.
Mordor Intelligence. (2025). Virtual Reality (VR) in Education Market Analysis — Industry Trends, Size and Forecast Report.	Soltani, N. & Rostami, A. (2025). Immersive learning at scale: Exploring the feasibility of VR in education. Proceedings of the 2025 ACM International Conference on Interactive Media Experiences (IMX '25).
PwC. (2022). What does virtual reality and the metaverse mean for training? PwC.	UNESCO. (2023). Smart Education Platform of China: Laureate of UNESCO Prize for ICT in Education.
Soltani, N. & Rostami, A. (2025). Immersive learning at scale: Exploring the feasibility of VR in education. Proceedings of the 2025 ACM International Conference on Interactive Media Experiences (IMX ‘25). DOI: 10.1145/3706370.3727859	Wang, H. et al. (2023). Chinese virtual simulation golden course: A case report. Heliyon, 9(6), e17159.
UNESCO. (2023). Smart Education Platform of China: Laureate of UNESCO Prize for ICT in Education.	Xiong, Y. et al. (2021). Ubiquitous e-Teaching and e-Learning: China's massive adoption of online education and launching MOOCs internationally during the COVID-19 outbreak. Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing, 2021, 6358976.
Wang, H. et al. (2023). Chinese virtual simulation golden course: A case report. Heliyon, 9(6), e17159. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17159	Xu, L., Zou, Q. & Zhou, Y. (2024). College students' continuing willingness to use virtual simulation learning systems: Empirical evidence from China. Frontiers of Digital Education, 1, 85–96.
Xiong, Y. et al. (2021). Ubiquitous e-Teaching and e-Learning: China‘s massive adoption of online education and launching MOOCs internationally during the COVID-19 outbreak. Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing, 2021, 6358976. DOI: 10.1155/2021/6358976	Yang, X. et al. (2024). The impact of virtual reality on practical skills for students in science and engineering education: A meta-analysis. International Journal of STEM Education, 11, 28.
Xu, L., Zou, Q. & Zhou, Y. (2024). College students’ continuing willingness to use virtual simulation learning systems: Empirical evidence from China. Frontiers of Digital Education, 1, 85–96. DOI: 10.1007/s44366-024-0024-9	Zhang, X. et al. (2022). Constructing an Edu-Metaverse ecosystem: A new and innovative framework. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 15(6), 685–696.
Yang, X. et al. (2024). The impact of virtual reality on practical skills for students in science and engineering education: A meta-analysis. International Journal of STEM Education, 11, 28. DOI: 10.1186/s40594-024-00487-2	Zhu, H. et al. (2023). The status of virtual simulation experiments in medical education in China. Medical Education Online, 28(1), 2272387.
Zhang, X. et al. (2022). Constructing an Edu-Metaverse ecosystem: A new and innovative framework. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 15(6), 685–696. DOI: 10.1109/TLT.2022.3210828	Zhuang, T., Xu, X. & Zhang, Y. (2025). Contextualizing and visualizing abstract theoretical knowledge for situated learning: Large-scale VR-supported higher education in China. Virtual Reality, 29, 4.
Zhu, H. et al. (2023). The status of virtual simulation experiments in medical education in China. Medical Education Online, 28(1), 2272387. DOI: 10.1080/10872981.2023.2272387
Zhuang, T., Xu, X. & Zhang, Y. (2025). Contextualizing and visualizing abstract theoretical knowledge for situated learning: Large-scale VR-supported higher education in China. Virtual Reality, 29, 4. DOI: 10.1007/s10055-024-01075-z