Session Information
01 SES 02 C, Digital Tools and Competences
Paper Session
Contribution
It is well-documented that educators’ prejudices surface in interactions with students and as a result influence students’ learning, academic beliefs, and attitudes toward school (Brophy, 1983; Cheng & Starks, 2002; DeCuir-Gunby, & Bindra, 2022; Meissel et al., 2017; Rubie-Davies, 2006). Prejudice is generally defined as “a negative bias toward a social category of people, with cognitive, affective, and behavioral components” (Paluck et al., 2012, p. 534). While explicit (conscious) biases are easier to identify and address because we are more aware of them, implicit (unconscious) biases tend to impact our behaviour more when we are tired, stressed, act under time constraints, or are faced with ambiguous or incomplete information (Staats, 2016).
Policymakers have increasingly called for anti-bias training for educators, however, most research on such efforts has shown that they have little sustained effects (Bezrukova et al., 2016; Carter et al., 2020; Paluck et al., 2021). As Carter and colleagues (2020) note, training often merely raises awareness of bias and in some cases triggers defensive reactions when participants are confronted with their biases without being given strategies to move forward.
With the technological advances in virtual reality (VR), the ability to immerse participants into different worlds and embody other personas has given rise to a new avenue of anti-bias training and research. VR interventions to combat bias have shown some promising results (Hatfield et al., 2022), however, these have been mainly experimental studies documenting bias in psychology or in the medical field. Only a few intervention studies exist, and these have mostly been light touch (i.e., under ten minutes) and conducted in labs with graduate students, thus their applicability to real-life contexts is uncertain (Paluck et al., 2021). Hatfield and colleagues (2022) conducted a systematic review of VR intervention research regarding racial bias and noted that 61 out of 68 studies reviewed only examined whether prejudices existed but did not explore solutions. These studies often used VR to enable participants to have contact with avatars presenting an out-group (e.g., avatars of a different race). More recently, studies have experimented with participants embodying a different race or skin colour avatar to enable perspective-taking (Groom et al., 2009), however, if the avatar lacked a real context or persona, biases seemed perpetuated. Hatfield and colleagues (2022) described this form of embodiment as ‘virtual Blackface’ (p.6). VR experiences in which the avatar has a name and history, and offers views into their experiences of prejudice, have shown more positive results in facilitating prejudice reduction (for one example, see Banakou et al., 2020).
Most research has been conducted in psychology or the medical field and few studies exist in education. Haghanikar and Hooper (2021) describe a preservice course aiming to build knowledge and awareness about homelessness. One assignment involved a VR experience embodying a homeless person. However, the impact of the VR experience or the course on students was not evaluated. A couple of small studies have explored the design of a virtual classroom for teacher training and had a small but positive impact on teachers’ empathy towards diverse students (Stavroulia et al., 2018; 2019).
We present a preliminary study exploring the potential of VR to combat teacher prejudice and increase empathy. In our study, educational leaders engaged in the VR experience and were subsequently interviewed to answer the following research questions: (1) What are educational leaders’ perceptions of the potential of a virtual reality scenario to increase feelings of empathy? (2) What are educational leaders’ perceptions of whether virtual reality scenarios from outside of education could be adapted as a professional learning tool in educational contexts?
Method
We invited education leaders from a state in the Northwest of the US to participate in the study. Participants were asked to watch two five-minute VR scenarios and participate in an interview about their experience. The VR scenarios were aimed at creating empathy by embodying a homeless man at work and at a shelter, and a woman of colour in a health care setting, both experiencing biased behaviour from others. Participants were able to look around the scenario and move their avatar’s arm and head, however, they could not interact with the environment (i.e., move around or move objects). Participants could hear the avatars’ conversations with people in the scenarios and their inner monologues about their experiences. Both VR scenarios also included short audio clips of people experiencing such situations alongside their photos. Nine educational leaders participated in the study. They held a range of roles, including at a university, in school districts, and school level. Six participants were female, and three were male; they ranged in age from 30s to 50s and included a range of racial/ethnic identities. Interviews of around 1 hour were conducted using a semi-structured interview guide and follow-up prompts to collect rich data about participants’ experiences. The interviews focused on participants’ feelings in and perceptions about the VR experience, factors that helped and hindered feelings of embodiment and empathy. Further, participants were asked how the VR could be adapted for an education context as professional development. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed by the researchers. Thematic analysis of the interview transcripts was conducted using an inductive approach by one researcher (Braun & Clarke, 2013). The initial broad code list with related data excerpts was shared with the team and reviewed in view of the data to refine the themes and definitions. A second coding iteration tested the discussed themes. A discussion of any discrepancies involved all researchers to ensure inter-rater reliability. A third and final coding iteration ensured the application of the final list of themes.
Expected Outcomes
Our findings highlight important aspects for consideration in the design of VR scenarios and their use in anti-bias training with educators. Overall, participants saw great potential in the use of VR due to its ability to capture and immerse users and its novel nature. Participants noted several technical aspects that enabled or hindered feelings of embodiment, including the quality of the graphics, the level of interactivity, and time for familiarisation for participants without prior VR experience. Participants also felt VR had great potential to increase empathy but noted several aspects to consider in the design of the scenarios. These included the type of biased behaviours displayed, the proximity of scenarios to educators’ own experiences, and ways to display the impact of ongoing and/or systemic bias. To adapt the VR scenario for anti-bias trainings for educators, participants noted that the experience should be embedded in training that included awareness raising before as well as debriefing after the VR experience. Another important aspect was the inclusion of strategies to change behaviour, with ideas that the VR could be used to show different – negative and positive - behaviours and their consequences for students. As highlighted in the conference call, in Europe and globally, there is an increasing acknowledgement of diversity, and educators and educational researchers need to reflect this diversity in their values and practices. VR experiences in which educators embody a student experiencing bias can raise educators’ awareness of their own biases, increase empathy, and lead to critical engagement with their beliefs and behaviours. However, considerable care needs to be taken in the design and use of VR scenarios to be able to reduce or break down participants’ defensiveness and enable participants to acknowledge deep-seated beliefs and engage in open discussions of how to embrace diversity in their classrooms.
References
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. Sage. Bezrukova, K., Spell, C.S., Perry, J.L., & Jehn, K.A. (2016). A meta-analytical integration of over 40 years of research on diversity training evaluation. Psychological Bulletin, 142(11), 1227–1274. Carter, E.R., Onyeador, I.N., & Lewis, N.A. (2020). Developing & delivering effective anti-bias training: Challenges & recommendations. Behavioral Science & Policy, 6(1), 57–70 Cheng, S., & Starks, B. (2002). Racial differences in the effects of significant others on students’ educational expectations. Sociology of Education, 75(4), 306–327. DeCuir-Gunby, J.T., & Bindra, V.G. (2022). How does teacher bias influence students? An introduction to the special issue on teachers’ implicit attitudes, instructional practices, and student outcomes. Learning and Instruction, 78, 101523. Groom, V., Bailenson, J.N., & Nass, C. (2009). The influence of racial embodiment on racial bias in immersive virtual environments. Social Influence, 4(3), 231–248. Haghanikar, T.M., & Hooper, L.M. (2021). Teaching about homelessness through multicultural picture books and virtual reality in preservice teacher education. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(3), 355-375. Hatfield, H.R., Ahn, S.J., Klein, M., & Nowak, K.L. (2022). Confronting whiteness through virtual humans: a review of 20 years of research in prejudice and racial bias using virtual environments. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 27(6), zmac016. Lai, C.K., Marini, M., Lehr, S.A., Cerruti, C., Shin, J.-E. L., Joy-Gaba, J.A., …Nosek, B.A. (2014). Reducing implicit racial preferences: A comparative investigation of 17 interventions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 143(4), 1765–1785. Meissel, K., Meyer, F., Yao, E.S., Rubie-Davies, C.M. (2017). Subjectivity of teacher judgments: Exploring student characteristics that influence teacher judgments of student ability. Teaching and Teacher Education, 65, 48–60. Paluck, E.L., Porat, R., Clark, C.S., & Green, D.P. (2021). Prejudice reduction: Progress and challenges. Annual Review of Psychology, 72, 533-560. Rubie-Davies, C.M. (2006). Teacher expectations and student self-perceptions: Exploring relationships. Psychology in the Schools, 43(5), 537–552. Staats, C. (2016). Understanding implicit bias: What educators should know. American Educator, 39(4), 29–43. Stavroulia, K.E., Baka, E., Lanitis, A., & Magnenat-Thalmann, N. (2018). Designing a virtual environment for teacher training: Enhancing presence and empathy. Proceedings of Computer Graphics International (pp. 273-282). Stavroulia, K.E., Christofi, M., Baka, E., Michael-Grigoriou, D., Magnenat-Thalmann, N., & Lanitis, A. (2019). Assessing the emotional impact of virtual reality-based teacher training. International Journal of Information and Learning Technology.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.