Over the last few years, among the latest generation of digital technologies, immersive environments, from Augmented Reality (AR) to Virtual Reality (VR), including 360-degree video, are gaining momentum in the education field. Indeed, according to recent literature (Evens et al. 2022; Rosendahl & Wagner, 2023), they positively influence students’ learning both in terms of engagement (Harrington et al., 2018) and knowledge transfer (Berns et al., 2018; Ranieri et al., 2022; Rupp et al., 2019). Focusing on 360 videos, they involve high levels of realism and sense of presence or embodiment (Berns et al., 2018; Rupp et al., 2019; Theelen et al., 2019), and they are also becoming increasingly affordable, enabling users to explore, experiment or practice dangerous or hard-to-reach environments, allowing learners to safely anticipate the experience (Rupp et al., 2019) and improving their capacity of knowledge transfer from familiar to unfamiliar context, the so-called "boundary crossing" process. In addition, they can have a positive impact on remembering and understanding visual and spatial dimensions (cognitive skills), on visual scanning or observational skills (psychomotor skills) as well as on controlling emotional response to stressful or difficult situations (affective skills) (Jensen et al., 2018). All circumstances where the (real or virtual) experience plays an important role in supporting learners’ advancement in knowledge and skills seem to benefit from the use of HMD viewers and 3D interactive videos (Alamäki et al., 2021; Ranieri et al., 2022). Indeed, from an educational point of view, 360-degree videos offer a richer experience than traditional video since they are based on a concept that rarely applies to standard visual content: presence. The sense of presence is created by positioning the users in the same position as the lens of the camera and offering them autonomy to direct their gaze in any direction. These affordances of presence and spatial orientation create an experience unlike anything previously available. These characteristics of 360-degree video, especially the immersive and interactive type, align with the principle of situated learning theory (Leave & Wenger, 1991) and experiential learning theory (Kolb, 1984).

Although 360-degree videos can provide students with the opportunity not only to hear about abstract contents but also to live vicarious experiences (e.g., Kang et al., 2020), the adoption of 360-degree video is still limited for different reasons such as low levels of digital competences of educators, lack of effective and easy-to-use tools for the production and storing of 360-degree videos, lack of examples showing the pedagogical value of this technology as well as how 360-degree videos can be implemented in the current practices (. With this in mind, the European Project “SEPA360 - Supporting Educators’ Pedagogical Application of 360° video” (SEPA360) (Erasmus Plus 2019-22) was launched in the pre-pandemic year with the aim of designing, developing and testing innovative learning scenarios based on the use of 360-degree video for improving teaching practices in higher education and faculty professional development. The project was coordinated by the University of Hull (UK) and the participation of the University of Florence (IT), the Wirtschaftsuniversitat Wien (AT), the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (GR) and Hogeschool PXL (BE). Specific objectives of the project were:

• enhancing the capacity of lecturers to create and use 360 video effectively as a teaching and learning tool

• enhancing the capacity of lecturers to use Vivista, a bespoke online 360 video platform to add additional interactivity

• improving university students’ confidence and capability by using 360 video to simulate real-world situations

• enhancing the ability of university decision-makers to embed 360 video as a teaching and learning tool across their institutions.

To achieve the objectives of SEPA360 different activities have been carried out, including a scoping study to identify benefits and constraints of the educational use of 360-degree video as well as the most effective ways of using 360-degree video for education; the organization of training events addressing university teachers to support the design and the implementation of learning scenarios based on the use of 360-degree video; the testing of the learning scenarios and evaluation of students’ reactions. 1) The Scoping Study. The Scoping Study analyzed the current literature regarding the applications of 360-degree video in the context of higher education, defining the state of the art on the topic and also providing useful material for 360-degree video designers, for university decision-makers and for IT managers. Moreover, the Scoping Study provided the ground to elaborate a typology for selecting the most appropriate educational strategies to design and use effectively 360-degree video. Furthermore, the Scoping Study offered elements for the realization of the 360-degree video platform. 2) Training and the preparation of the learning scenarios. To promote teachers’ digital competences for teaching with 360-degree video, each partner identified six digital champions within its university with the task of designing, creating and using 360-degree videos within their teachings. To enable teachers’s use of 360-degree video in their teaching, training was needed not only on purely technical aspects, but also on planning and methodological elements. For implementation, an open source software was used, i.e. Vivista, to ensure sustainability for public state universities and future implementation. In addition, as all open source software, Vivista can be better adapted to the specific needs of the high ed context. 3) Testing and students’ reactions. The learning scenarios were tested in all partner countries and a survey was administered to collect students’ reactions (N=221). The survey included questions on – among other things – the following aspects: a) students’ perceptions of the value of the 360-degree video as a learning tool; c) students’ perceptions of the 360-degree video from a technological point of view, including questions inspired by the Technology Acceptance Model; c) students’ perceptions related to the sense of reality/presence that the student perceived during the immersive.

The research project has achieved several results. Firstly, it produced innovative advancements providing both theoretical and practical guidance and resources to enable university academics and other staff to use 360-degree video effectively. Up to now most 360-degree video examples have been technical in nature and mainly used by commercial enterprises, but not academics or teachers. SEPA360 has bridged the gap between these technical examples and has shown university academics the value of incorporating this technology into the HE curriculum. Secondly, the project has developed a unique typology to support teachers in the design of effective interventions based on 360-degree videos. This was produced after an extensive search and review of the existing research which brought to the identification of the most appropriate ways in which to use 360-degree video effectively, including lecturing (i.e., to represent specific contents), modelling (i.e. to show concrete procedures) and exploring (i.e., to bring learners everywhere and make them able to explore any place). Thirdly, the project provided an entirely free service that enables users to edit and insert interaction points in existing 360-degree video or those they have created themselves. Although this has been possible in still images for some time, it is far more complex to achieve in moving video which discouraged universities and other institutions from adopting this technology. Finally, the project has implemented and tested twenty-three 360-degree videos in different fields such as physical education, agricultural education, engineering etc. During the research workshop some examples of 360-degree videos with interactive points will be shown and discussed together with a presentation of the methodological and technical tools developed by SEPA360 to design and implement them. In particular, storyboarding procedures for immersive videos will be explained taking into account instructional needs and uses.

A. Alamäki, A., A. Dirin, J. Suomala, C. Rhee, (2021). Students’ experiences of 2D and 360° videos with or without a low-cost VR headset: An experimental study in higher education. A. Berns, J.M. Mota, J.M. Dodero, I. Ruiz-Rube (2018). "Exploring the potential of a 360 video application for foreign language learning," ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, pp. 776–780. L. H. Bronkhorst, S. F. Akkerman (2016). “At the Boundary of School: Continuity and Discontinuity in Learning Across Contexts.” Educational Research Review, 19, 18-35. M. Evens, M. Empsen, W. Hustinx (2022). “A Literature Review on 360-Degree Video as an Educational Tool: Towards Design Guidelines.” Journal of Computers in Education https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-022-00233-z H. Theelen, A. van den Bent, P. den Brok (2019). “Using 360-Degree Videos in Teacher Education to Improve Preservice Teachers' Professional Interpersonal Vision.” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 35 (5): 582–94. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12361.C.M. Harrington, D.O. Kavanagh, G. Wright Ballester, A. Wright Ballester, P. Dicker, O. Traynor, A. Hill, S.Tierney (2018). "360° Operative Videos: A Randomised Cross-Over Study Evaluating Attentiveness and Information Retention," Journal of Surgical Education, 75, 993–1000,. L. Jensen, F. Konradsen (2018). A review of the use of virtual reality head-mounted displays in education and training. Education and Information Technologies, 23(4), 1515–1529. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9676-0 N. Kang, D. Ding, M.B. Van Riemsdijk, N. Morina, M.A. Neerincx, W.P. Brinkman (2020). Self-identification with a Virtual Experience and Its Moderating Effect on Self-efficacy and Presence. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 37(2), 181-196, DOI: 10.1080/10447318.2020.1812909 D. A. Kolb (1984). Experiential Learning Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. New York: Prentice Hall. J. Lave, E. Wenger (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Periperal Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. M. Ranieri, D. Luzzi, S. Cuomo, I. Bruni (2022). “If and How Do 360-degree Videos Fit Into Education Settings? Results From a Scoping Review of Empirical Research.” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12683 P. Rosendahl,, & I. Wagner. (2023). “360° videos in education–A systematic literature review on application areas and future potentials”. Education and Information Technologies, 1-37. M.A. Rupp, K.L. Odette, J. Kozachuk, J.R. Michaelis, J.A. Smither, D.S. McConnell (2019). “Investigating learning outcomes and subjective experiences in 360-degree videos,” Computers & Education, 128, 256–268.