As a Senior Lecturer in Education and current PhD student, this presentation aims to explore both the methodology and methods selected for the next stage of this research project. The focus is on the use of Immersive Learning Environments (ILEs) and the promotion of learning within early childhood. The rationale for this research stemmed from witnessing the development of digital resources within education, as a Primary Teacher and Senior Lecturer.  More recently, I have led the development of the Early Years Virtual Learning Environment (EYVE) to develop an immersive games-based learning experience for trainee professionals, providing an insight of how ILEs can be used to promote learning for higher education learners. This has allowed me to question whether the lessons which have been learnt can be applied within the field of early childhood. In the Education Technology Survey (DfE, 2021) it was revealed that 59% of teachers stated that both safeguarding, and data concerns prevented the integration of technology. Whereas Ofcom (2022: p13) identified that ‘58% of pre-schoolers parents felt that ‘the benefits of the internet for my child outweigh any risks’. This echoes disparity between home and setting environments and I feel the opportunity to explore ILEs as a platform between both stakeholders could support the prospect of working more collaboratively to support the 21^st century child (Orben, 2021).

An ILE was defined by Sutherland (1965) as a ‘Wonderland which Alice walked’. This definition closely aligns to the scope of immersive technologies, recognising the diversity of each journey as an individual experience. In contrast, this concept of an ‘alternative environment’, Radiant et al., (2020: p3) states that ‘the awareness of time and the real world often becomes disconnected’. This barrier could suggest a negative perception for the application of ILEs within education which could be argued that when considering the position of early childhood there has been limited research surrounding the application of immersive technologies. Internationally, many practitioners remain unconvinced of how this can be used within play (Hatzigianni and Kalaizidis 2018), for example, disparity was shown between the application of digital technology within Greece and China with teacher knowledge and skills identified as a barrier (Liu et al., 2014).  Johnston (2021: p5) highlights that immersion in early childhood is ‘screen-based play which is of great concern’ meaning that the integration of this approach is a barrier. Younger children often use screen-based technology to become ‘immersed’ in an alternative virtual environment, for example, ‘Playdoh touch’ (2017) enabled young children to create designs and characters with the playdoh to scan and engage within a game-play environment. This opportunity provided learners to create and animate a character, these are however, limited to the shapes provided by the creator, which already suggests that the element of creativity is one which is lost within this immersive experience. Perez (2016) argues that this type of immersion only offers to amuse learners for a short time, resulting in learning and development being prevented.

Drawing on the theoretical framework of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory (1992), I argue that stakeholders need to identify the diversity of how young children’s knowledge is shaped through the exposure and influence of technology within a range of contexts. I feel it is also important to recognise that cultural context plays a vital role in children’s interpretation of their actions when using immersive technologies, supporting the key design features of ILEs (Taylor 2009; Bronfenbrenner 1992).

Furthermore, through understanding children’s diversity in knowledge towards immersive learning experiences, it provides an opportunity for educators and parents to reflect and support opportunities to develop skills within both the home and setting context effectively.

The presentation will focus on an action research-based research methodology. This was selected as I recognise that to support the effectiveness of the project the main intention is to bring ‘critical awareness, improvement and change in practice, setting or system’ (Wellington 2015: p34). The engagement of action research also demonstrates similarities in relation to the pace in which technology moves forward, identifying the need to plan and respond to what had been observed within the study. Koshy (2006: p5) states that ‘the process is likely to be more fluid, open and responsive’. The research questions for this study are: 1. What are early years educators’ and parents’ understandings of (i) ILEs and (ii) learning in early childhood education? 2. What is the impact ILEs could have on the promotion of learning within the home and setting context? 3. How can key features of ILEs and learning be synthesised to design ILEs that promote learning in early childhood education? The current intention of the project is to conduct a three-phase approach when applying the methods. 1. Phase 1 will use a questionnaire to gather both educators and parents’ perspectives of ILEs and learning within early childhood. 2. Phase 2 will then comprise of an observation and implementation stage which will apply a range of ILEs using Extended Reality (XR) within both home and setting contexts. 3. Finally, phase 3 will use focus groups to enable stakeholders to reflect on the effectiveness of the ILEs used within phase 2.

Through applying a three-phase process within this research project it is hoped that this will enable me to reflect on the diversity of parents, practitioners’, and children’s perspectives of ILEs. This presentation will reflect on the beginning stages of the data collection process in Phase 1. As there is limited research in the application of immersive experiences within early childhood, it is important to review the perceptions. As Johnson (2021) suggests that immersive learning technologies may only be viewed as something which is primarily screen-based. I feel it is also important within this first phase of research to identify parents’ and practitioners’ perceptions as the diversity in settings and home experiences can establish whether immersive technologies are used and identify whether there are any commonalities. Konca (2021, p1097) highlights that children live ‘in digitally rich home environments… with parents and home settings playing a key role in children’s interaction with digital technologies’. This echoes the need for this research to identify the importance of home and setting contexts to understand how ILEs can potentially be used to promote both the learning and development of young children. Within research, the context for digital play within early education is still in its infancy, with practitioners remaining unconvinced of how this can be used within play (Hatzigianni and Kalaizidis 2018), with disparity shown between the application of digital technology with teacher knowledge and skills being identified as a barrier (Vidal-Hall et al., 2020; Mertala, 2019). As the researcher, I recognise this will be the main challenge within my research process, supporting both practitioners and parents to understand the role of ILEs as a potential tool to support learning. As I move forward into phase 2 of the research process this will enable stakeholders to use, apply and observe ILEs within the environment.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1992). Ecological systems theory. In R. Vasta (Ed.), Six theories of child development: Revised formulations and current issues (pp. 187–249). Jessica Kingsley Publishers. DfE, (2021). Education Technology (EdTech) Survey 2020-21. [online] Assets.publishing.service.gov.uk. Available at: [19 January 2023] Hatzigianni, M. Kalaitzidis, I. (2018) Early childhood educators’ attitudes and beliefs around the use of touchscreen technologies by children under three years of age. British Journal of Educational Technology. 49 (5), pp.883-895. Johnston, K., (2021). Engagement and Immersion in Digital Play: Supporting Young Children’s Digital Wellbeing. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(19), pp.10-179. Konca, A. (2021) Digital Technology Usage of Young Children: Screen Time and Families. Early Childhood Education Journal. 50 (0), pp.1097-1108. Koshy, V. (2005). Action Research for Improving Practice, A practical guide. London: Paul Chapman Publishing. Mertala, P. (2019). Teachers’ beliefs about technology integration in early childhood education: A meta-ethnographical synthesis of qualitative research. Computers in Human Behavior. 101, pp.334-349. Ofcom, (2022). Children and parents: media use and attitudes report 2022. [online] Ofcom. Available at: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0024/234609/childrens-media-use-and-attitudes-report-2022.pdf [19 January 2023] Orben, A. (2021) Digital diet: A 21st century approach to understanding digital technologies and development. Infant and Child Development. 31 (1), pp.1-5. Perez, S (2016). Hands-on with Play-Doh Touch, the app that brings kids’ creations to life. [online] TechCrunch. Available at: https://techcrunch.com/2016/11/18/hands-on-with-play-doh-touch-the-app-that-brings-kids-creations-to-life/ [19 January 2023] Radianti, J., Majchrzak, T., Fromm, J. and Wohlgenannt, I., (2020). A systematic review of immersive virtual reality applications for higher education: Design elements, lessons learned, and research agenda. Computers & Education, 147, p.1037-78. Sutherland, I. (1965) The Ultimate Display. In proceedings of the IFIP Congress, USA, 1965. Information Processing Techniques Office: ARPA, OSD Taylor, T.L. (2009) The Assemblage of Play. Games and Culture. 4 (4), pp.331-339. Vidal-Hall, C. Flewitt, R. Wyse, D. (2020) Early Childhood practitioner beliefs about digital media: integrating technology into a child-centred classroom environment. Early Childhood Education Research Journal. 28 (2), pp. 167-181. Wellington, J. (2015). Educational research: Contemporary issues and practical approaches. London: Bloomsbury Academic.