Investigates spatial reasoning in high school students using VR assessments, suggesting improved diagnostics for chemistry education.
The rapid advancement of immersive technologies, such as Virtual Reality (VR), presents new opportunities to enhance chemistry education by linking abstract concepts to interactive, three-dimensional representations. This study investigates the application of a VR-enhanced two-tier diagnostic assessment to assess high school students’ integrated conceptual and representational reasoning in molecular geometry and intermolecular forces. The instrument comprises seven items that combine interactive 3D molecular visualizations with paired multiple-choice questions targeting answer accuracy and underlying reasoning. Data from students in Sukoharjo, Indonesia, were scored using a balanced accuracy–reasoning rubric and analyzed with Principal Component Analysis (PCA), k-means clustering, trajectory plots, and t-SNE-based response density maps to characterize patterns of performance across items. The results indicate that many students can correctly identify molecular shapes in VR yet struggle to provide theory-based explanations grounded in VSEPR and intermolecular interactions, revealing frequent misalignment between spatial recognition and conceptual justification. Three broad performance profiles were identified, ranging from low accuracy and weak reasoning to high accuracy and high consistency patterns, highlighting the value of going beyond correctness alone to capture the depth and coherence of reasoning. These findings suggest that VR-enhanced two-tier instruments can serve as rich diagnostic tools for revealing conceptual and representational difficulties, as well as informing targeted instructional interventions. Implications are discussed for the classroom-feasible design of VR assessments and for future AI-supported analytic systems that assist, rather than replace, teachers in interpreting students’ reasoning profiles.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yamtinah et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: