Educators often struggle to provide pre‑service teachers with opportunities to practise theoretical knowledge in realistic situations (Chernikova et al, 2020). Although many teacher education systems strive to integrate theoretical and practical components, OECD (2013). Analyses show considerable variation in how practicum is structured and implemented across and within European countries. Pre‑service teachers should be able to practise essential teaching skills; the amount and structure of practicum vary considerably both between European universities and within universities in individual countries. This inconsistency highlights a growing need for alternative and complementary formats that allow students to develop classroom leadership in a more equitable, structured and pedagogically meaningful way (OECD, 2013).

The aim of this scoping review is to map studies focused on virtual learning environments and simulation- based training in teacher education with a focus on instruction to enhance pupils’ writing abilities. To address the aim, one of the research questions explored in the study is:

What characterizes previous research on simulation in teacher education?

Increasingly virtual learning environments and simulations have thus become central tools in teacher education (McGarr, 2020; Piro & O’Callaghan, 2019). By enabling interaction with avatars representing pupils in scenarios that reflect real classroom dynamics, simulations provide a structured way for students to gain experience without the ethical constraints of practising on real pupils. These environments can operate asynchronously or synchronously, and authenticity may be enhanced through a Human in the Loop (HIL) model in which an operator controls the avatars in real time, allowing for spontaneous and unpredictable interactions that mirror genuine classroom behaviour (Howell & Mikeska 2021).

Piro and O’Callaghan (2019) highlights how simulations support students’ progression from a limiting form of learning—where they oscillate between old and new knowledge—to a more stable, pre‑professional form of learning. Because this process differs between individuals, simulations sometimes need to be adapted to the student’s current stage of development. Also, Howell and Mikeska (2021) outline the reflection as essential for this learning to be effective, and group‑based reflection has been shown to promote deeper development of leadership skills than individual reflection. Importantly, such reflection must focus on the student’s didactic choices rather than solely on the technical reactions of the avatars, ensuring that the learning remains pedagogically grounded.

Simulations also provide a safe environment as Cohen et al (2020) highlights in their study in which students can take risks, experiment with alternative strategies and make mistakes without consequences for actual pupils. However, researchers emphasize that simulations should not prioritise technical realism above pedagogical intention. Instead, they must be designed to reflect the diversity of real classrooms to avoid reinforcing stereotypes and narrow representations of pupils.

Universities have therefore begun to explore how virtual environments might support pre‑service teachers in practising classroom leadership before entering school‑based placements. Samuelsson, Samuelsson and Thorsten (2021) investigated how simulated classroom environments can offer teacher students opportunities to develop leadership skills. Their study demonstrated that virtual environments, particularly those that allow interaction with student avatars, help students understand how theoretical knowledge intersects with practical decision‑making in classroom situations. Participants reported feeling more prepared and confident before undertaking their school‑based practicum, suggesting that virtual environments can serve as a vital bridge between coursework and practice.

Taken together, the literature indicates that combining theoretical knowledge with opportunities to practise in virtual simulations offers significant benefits for pre‑service teachers. Virtual environments complement traditional practicum by providing equitable experiences in classroom leadership and creating space for reflection, didactic decision‑making and the development of essential competencies needed to create structured, motivating and inclusive learning environments in future teaching practice (Cohen et al 2020; Howell & Mikeska 2021).

A scoping review is chosen because it allows for a broader exploration of a research field compared to a systematic literature review, where search criteria are typically narrower and more precisely defined. Scoping reviews make it possible to map the extent, range, and nature of research within a field (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005; Munn et al., 2018). According to Arksey and O’Malley (2005), this approach is systematic yet inclusive, enabling researchers to identify gaps in existing knowledge and areas that require further investigation. A scoping review may include studies with diverse methodological approaches and is therefore less restrictive than a traditional systematic review. Research questions in a scoping review are typically broad and not limited to a single design or methodological tradition, which makes it possible to include both quantitative and qualitative studies (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005). Despite its breadth, the process must still follow a clear and transparent structure. Electronic searches were conducted in the databases ERIC, Google Scholar, SCOPUS and SwePub using various combinations of keywords “simulation-based learning environments”, “writing development” and “learning in higher education”. In accordance with the inclusion criteria for the review, the included articles were published in peer- review journals between 2015 and 2025. In addition, ancestral searches in the articles retrieved in the database search were conducted. Inter- rater agreement between the researchers was assured in assessing abstract and full articles. A narrative synthesis approach was used to identify challenges and possibilities associated with using simulations- based training in teacher education to support teacher students in planning and conducting writing instruction for early learners. In accordance with Arksey and O’Malley’s (2005) emphasis on involving multiple researchers to ensure the importance of rigour, reduce bias, and strengthen the overall understanding of the research field. In this scoping review, four researchers are involved in the screening and analysis of the conducted studies. The selection and organisation of studies were guided by a structured coding process. After the initial screening phase, each eligible study was coded to document among other codes the relevance to the review question. This coding allowed for the creation of a comprehensive evidence map, supporting both the identification of research gaps and the determination of which studies should be included in the final analysis.

Preliminary findings show that simulation-based environments offer teacher students valuable opportunities to practise classroom leadership and that the simulation environments also provide teacher educators with new possibilities to integrate practical components into courses across different subject areas. Pre- service teachers have opportunities to practise a variety of instructional methods and to explore how these methods can be adapted to the diverse needs of pupils typically found in early years classrooms. A central conclusion is that virtual environments provide a degree of safety that traditional schools cannot offer, specifically the opportunity to make mistakes without adverse consequences for real-life students. Simulations allow students to 'stop and redo,' a feature that is fundamental for fostering the confidence to experiment with new pedagogical strategies and for the development of an active professional role The initial literature search also suggests that simulations are most used to train teachers’ leadership skills rather than to support the development of subject specific teaching methods. These results highlight an important gap: the potential for teacher educators to use simulation environments to create practical learning opportunities that complement theoretical coursework. This is especially relevant as research show that theory and practice need to be tightly interwoven in teacher education. “For decades, bridging the gaps between coursework and practice for teacher candidates (TCs), or pre- or in-service teachers enrolled in teacher preparation coursework, has been a consistent challenge” (Korthagen, 2007; Shulman, 1998). Taken together, these preliminary insights indicate that simulation environments may serve as a valuable bridge between theoretical knowledge and practical teaching skills, offering teacher students structured opportunities to rehearse and refine their instructional methods before entering school based practicum.

Arksey, H. & O’Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International journal of social research methodology. (8:1). 19-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616 Chernikova, O., Heitzmann, N., Stadler, M., Holzberger, D., Seidel, T., & Fischer, F. (2020). Simulation-Based Learning in Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 90(4), 499–541. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320933544 Cohen, J., Wong, V., Krishnamachari, A., & Berlin, R. (2020). Teacher Coaching in a Simulated Environment. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 42(2), 208–231. Howell, H. & Mikeska, J. N. (2021). Approximations of practice as a framework for understanding authenticity in simulations of teaching. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 53(1), 8-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2020.1809033 McGarr, O. (2020). The use of virtual simulations in teacher education to develop service teachers’ behavior and classroom management skills: implication for reflective practice. Journal of education for teaching. 46(2), 159- 169. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1724654 Munn, Z., Peters, M, D, J., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A. & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical research methodology. 18 (143). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x OECD. (2013). Initial teacher education and continuing training policies in a comparative perspective. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/initial-teacher-education-and-continuing-training-policies-in-a-comparative-perspective_5kmbphh7s47h-en.html Piro, J. S. & O’Callaghan, C. (2019). Journing towards the profession: Exploring liminal learning within mixed reality simulations. Action in teacher education. 41(1), 606- 626. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2018.1534221 Pollock, D., Evans, C., Menghao Jia, R., Alexander, L., Pieper, D., Brandão de Moraes, É., Peters, M. D. J., Tricco, A. C., Khalil, H., Godfrey, C. M., Saran, A., Campbell, F., & Munn, Z. (2024). “How-to”: scoping review? Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 176, Article 111572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111572 Samuelsson, M., Samuelsson, J., & Thorsten, A. (2021). Simulation training is as effective as teaching pupils: Development of efficacy beliefs among pre-service teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 29(2), 225-. https://doi.org/10.70725/828292oalfvv Young, M. K., & Gillespie Rouse, A. (2025). A Systematic Review of Rehearsal Use in Literacy Methods Courses. Literacy Research and Instruction, 64(4), 431–447. https://doi-org.ep.bib.mdh.se/10.1080/19388071.2024.2366208