View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Architecture in School Practice: Possible Tools for Supporting Spatial Literacy

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Architecture in School Practice: Possible Tools for Supporting Spatial Literacy
Language: English
Authors: Ingri Strand (ORCID 0009-0009-1820-8145), Liv Merete Nielsen
Source: International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 2025 35(4):1597-1618.
Availability: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 22
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Secondary Education
Descriptors: Artificial Intelligence, Physical Environment, Spatial Ability, Secondary School Students, Foreign Countries, Building Design, Computer Assisted Design, Architectural Education, Assignments, Visualization
Geographic Terms: Norway
DOI: 10.1007/s10798-024-09951-0
ISSN: 0957-7572
1573-1804
Abstract: Laypeople's participation in the planning of built environments is dependent on their spatial literacy, and it is therefore important to develop this through general education. In Norway, architectural assignments in the subject of Art and crafts are aimed at enhancing spatial literacy, but not all activities are equally educative. The use of Virtual Reality (VR) can contribute to students' understanding of and engagement with spatial properties, but few studies have been conducted at the lower secondary school level. Therefore, this study was conducted to explore how pupils in a Norwegian lower secondary school reflect upon and use floor plan drawings, digital 3D models, and VR in architectural assignments aiming to support their spatial literacy. Although VR has the potential to facilitate activities that support the pupils' spatial literacy, the pupils in this study tended to use VR to a lesser extent, mostly towards the end of their projects. We suggest that the finished look of the VR visualisations, conceptualised herein as 'perceived finishedness', may have contributed to this. This highlights the use of VR as a visualisation tool rather than a design process tool.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2025
Accession Number: EJ1485568
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwH6mLNI5e1v98GWkdI-4qSUAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDFLH-QCdT7P-PLVitwIBEICBm7QiMljc1xhV-NLH47nRkJPxhK8Ls4hK7DjYzuJl_J7bDPEVsfdq8MTMaTwBfPcwdMzN_G5NAs4UXKYROlkWELvJqM6afkI4Zvokp5MKZdvXYR7T2DlNEwcwzgkomID48Gl0T66KiUpNgsz0ldnES-8lW-Vac-OUG2iKz6_Th5OTH_G_hQf7zO8pHaKlH4KrUiccFzzlDf8ZgB5v
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0187094068;ogv01sep.25;2025Aug05.03:20;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0187094068-1">Architecture in school practice: possible tools for supporting spatial literacy </title> <p>Laypeople's participation in the planning of built environments is dependent on their spatial literacy, and it is therefore important to develop this through general education. In Norway, architectural assignments in the subject of Art and crafts are aimed at enhancing spatial literacy, but not all activities are equally educative. The use of Virtual Reality (VR) can contribute to students' understanding of and engagement with spatial properties, but few studies have been conducted at the lower secondary school level. Therefore, this study was conducted to explore how pupils in a Norwegian lower secondary school reflect upon and use floor plan drawings, digital 3D models, and VR in architectural assignments aiming to support their spatial literacy. Although VR has the potential to facilitate activities that support the pupils' spatial literacy, the pupils in this study tended to use VR to a lesser extent, mostly towards the end of their projects. We suggest that the finished look of the VR visualisations, conceptualised herein as 'perceived finishedness', may have contributed to this. This highlights the use of VR as a visualisation tool rather than a design process tool.</p> <p>Keywords: Virtual reality; Built environment; Design education; Design process; Spatial literacy; Education Specialist Studies In Education</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-2">Introduction</hd> <p>The general public's involvement in planning a local built environment is determined by law in Norway (Planning & Building Act, [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref1">46</reflink>], § 5). An important prerequisite for real involvement is that the user participants can understand the plans. For example, they must be able to imagine the dimensions of a built environment based on the drawings provided. Without this understanding, the general public would merely play a symbolic role and not have any real influence (Nielsen, [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref2">39</reflink>]; Nielsen & Digranes, [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref3">40</reflink>]). To prepare the general public for democratic participation and involvement, spatial literacy has been included in the Norwegian National Curriculum since 2006 through the subject of <emph>Art and crafts,</emph> often in relation to architectural assignments. Between 2006 and 2020, architecture was one of the four main areas of the Art and crafts curriculum (Utdanningsdirektoratet, [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref4">51</reflink>]). The current curriculum includes competency goals related to architecture for Years 1–10, such as being able to discuss the use, function, and material choices of different buildings and sketch suggestions for new architecture after Year 4 (ages 9–10) (Norwegian Directorate for Education & Training, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref5">43</reflink>]) and to sketch and model new solutions for local built environments after Year 10 (ages 15–16) (Norwegian Directorate for Education & Training, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref6">42</reflink>]). Art and crafts is a compulsory subject for Years 1–10 and is the fifth most comprehensive subject in primary and lower secondary schools.</p> <p>Architectural assignments in the Norwegian Art and crafts subject are complex tasks that seek to enhance pupils' spatial literacy. These assignments usually involve sketching and creating digital or analogue three-dimensional models of built environments. At the lower secondary level, if not earlier, pupils are often introduced to reading and drawing floor plans. While these activities have the potential to develop pupils' spatial literacy, it is still possible to complete such assignments without visualising full-scale built environments. When drawing a floor plan, pupils can distribute the given area into a satisfactory shape without imagining the full-scale measurements or how it would work in three dimensions. Similarly, they can successfully create three-dimensional models by focusing on the inner logic and proportions, without considering the full-scale built environments the models represent. It is therefore necessary to take a closer look at how various visualisation tools can facilitate pupils' engagement with the spatial properties of the built environments they design, as this would ensure that architectural assignments further support pupils' spatial literacy.</p> <p>Previous studies in the area of architecture, design, and engineering education at the upper secondary education and university levels have described how Virtual Reality (VR) can improve people's understanding of the spatial properties of designs (e.g. Häkkilä et al., [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref7">17</reflink>]; Kim et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref8">28</reflink>]; Nisha, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref9">41</reflink>]), suggesting that VR could be a useful tool for pupils of Year 10 as well. In this study, we collaborated with an Art and crafts teacher on an architectural assignment in a lower secondary school and explored the addition of VR to this assignment. Due to the complex nature of spatial literacy, we did not aim to measure the pupils' learning outcomes but, instead, focused on how the tools utilised in the process facilitated the pupils' engagement with the spatial properties of their designs. Based on Dewey's ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref10">14</reflink>]) theory of how knowledge is developed through experience, we assumed that this kind of engagement would contribute to enhancing the pupils' spatial literacy. We developed the following question for the study: <emph>How do pupils reflect upon and use floor plan drawings, digital 3D models, and VR in architectural assignments aimed at supporting their spatial literacy?</emph></p> <hd id="AN0187094068-3">Spatial literacy and spatial skills</hd> <p>Spatial literacy is the ability to use spatial skills in complex, practical tasks (Lane et al., [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref11">30</reflink>]). Examples of spatial skills include the ability to make length estimations or mentally manipulate, rotate, twist, or invert objects (Buckley et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref12">8</reflink>]; McGee, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref13">36</reflink>]). Understanding the relationship between two-dimensional representations and three-dimensional objects is also an implicit part of spatial skills (Lohman, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref14">32</reflink>]; Macnab & Johnstone, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref15">35</reflink>]; Sutton et al., [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref16">50</reflink>]). Spatial skills are malleable, and relevant educational activities can develop students' spatial skills (Berkan et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref17">2</reflink>]; Julià & Antoli, [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref18">25</reflink>]; Uttal et al., [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref19">52</reflink>]). Moore-Russo et al. ([<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref20">38</reflink>]) defined spatially literacy as being able to '(a) visualize spatial objects; (b) reason about properties of and relationships between spatial objects; and (c) send (and receive) communication about spatial objects and relationships' (p. 98). In other words, having a high level of spatial literacy means having well-developed spatial skills and being able to use them in complex tasks involving others. While spatial skills or abilities can be measured through standardised tests (Ilić & Đukić, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref21">22</reflink>]), spatial literacy—which involves combining spatial skills in complex tasks—cannot be measured easily or reliably in tests. Competence is contextualised when spatial literacy is connected to built environments. Designing built environments entails shifting between imagining what is to be built and creating design conceptualisations through two-dimensional drawings and digital and analogue three-dimensional models, all of which relate to full-scale built environments (Bhatt & Schulz, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref22">3</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-4">Virtual Reality and levels of immersion</hd> <p>VR displays a completely virtual environment decorrelated from the user's real environment (Parveau & Adda, [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref23">45</reflink>]). In the fields of architecture, design, and engineering, the use of VR has grown rapidly in the last 15 years and is considered a relevant technology for the future (Hettithanthri & Hansen, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref24">20</reflink>]; Huber et al., [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref25">21</reflink>]). VR is commonly divided into three categories: immersive, semi-immersive, and non-immersive (Baus & Bouchard, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref26">1</reflink>]; Ma & Zheng, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref27">33</reflink>]; Maas & Hughes, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref28">34</reflink>]); the first and last types have been used in this study. In <emph>immersive VR</emph>, head-mounted displays (HMDs), often called VR glasses, or the dedicated room of a cave automatic virtual environment (CAVE) are used to fully immerse oneself in a virtual environment. In this study, immersive VR was achieved with simple VR glasses made of cardboard and plastic lenses that use mobile phones as screens. This was an affordable solution for immersive VR, which makes it more relevant to primary and lower secondary education. However, some participants in our study were not able to use the VR mode of the mobile app; instead, they used the <emph>non-immersive</emph> mode. Figure 1 shows how both modes look on a mobile screen. Non-immersive VR includes virtual environments that are displayed on the screens of conventional graphics workstations, such as the 3D modelling software SketchUp. Considering that the activities of creating a 3D model and evaluating it in a VR walkthrough are distinctly different, we refer to the modelling process as 'working in SketchUp' or '3D modelling', whereas walkthroughs in the non-immersive VR mode are referred to as 'viewing in VR' or simply 'VR', with the level of immersion specified when relevant.</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 1 Simplified, non-photorealistic views of a 3D model in the VR mode (left) and non-immersive walk mode (right) of the mobile app Kubity</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-5">Previous research on the use of VR in designing built environments</hd> <p>Several research projects have investigated the use of VR in designing built environments for architecture, design, and engineering education at the university level. Different VR systems have been used in these studies, including non-immersive VR on a computer screen (Wu, [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref29">54</reflink>]), immersive VR glasses (Hartless et al., [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref30">19</reflink>]; Jensen, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref31">23</reflink>]; Kim et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref32">28</reflink>]; Mejia-Puig & Chandrasekera, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref33">37</reflink>]; Nisha, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref34">41</reflink>]; Zhang & Chen, [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref35">55</reflink>]), and immersive CAVE systems with projections or screens on the walls, floor, or ceiling of a room (Dorta et al., [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref36">15</reflink>]; Halabi, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref37">18</reflink>]; Sopher et al., [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref38">48</reflink>]). The participating students were found to have an improved understanding of their designs' spatial properties (Dorta et al., [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref39">15</reflink>]; Jensen, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref40">23</reflink>]; Kim et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref41">28</reflink>]; Nisha, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref42">41</reflink>]; Sopher et al., [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref43">48</reflink>]) and their buildings' layouts (Zhang & Chen, [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref44">55</reflink>]) when using VR. In their targeted study, Mejia-Puig and Chandrasekera ([<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref45">37</reflink>]) found that the use of immersive VR helps develop design students' spatial skills. Further, Halabi's ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref46">18</reflink>]) students uncovered design issues that would have been difficult or impossible to identify on a desktop display. VR can also be used to assess building designs from the perspective of a wheelchair-bound occupant (Hartless et al., [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref47">19</reflink>]). In previous studies, students were generally positive towards VR (Halabi, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref48">18</reflink>]; Wu, [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref49">54</reflink>]; Zhang & Chen, [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref50">55</reflink>]). However, one student in Sopher et al.'s study ([<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref51">48</reflink>]) had an unpleasant experience partly because the 'immersive display emphasised undeveloped places in the digital model' (p. 2119). Kim et al. ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref52">28</reflink>]) recommended starting the design process with traditional media, such as pencils and paper, as their research results showed that the cognitive load of a VR interface restricted their participants' creativity.</p> <p>In two previous studies, immersive VR was compared with other visualisation methods, namely two-dimensional drawings (Kandi et al., [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref53">26</reflink>]) and non-immersive VR (Paes et al., [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref54">44</reflink>]). In Kandi et al.'s ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref55">26</reflink>]) study, construction students used both two-dimensional drawings and VR to assess a building. The students were able to identify more design mistakes when they used VR than when they used the drawings, and the students who started with VR could transfer their knowledge regarding spatial properties and other issues from VR to the two-dimensional drawings (Kandi et al., [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref56">26</reflink>]). In Paes et al.'s ([<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref57">44</reflink>]) study, participants made significantly more accurate distance estimates in an immersive environment than in a non-immersive environment, and immersive technology provided them with 'a better 3D perception of the architectural representation' (Paes et al., [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref58">44</reflink>], p. 12).</p> <p>Most researchers have focused on higher education, but D'Souza et al. ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref59">13</reflink>]) recruited participants aged 11–16 years from a summer camp and explored how designing a virtual zoo could improve the skills given in Gardner's multiple intelligence framework. Although the results varied and not all skills were sufficiently fostered, the VR interface helped those students who needed extra support. However, the participants' design solutions differed from what the researchers regarded as an ideal solution, which the researchers attributed to the students getting lost in the 3D experience.</p> <p>VR has also been explored as a tool for increasing user participation regarding built environments. Chowdhury and Schnabel ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref60">9</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref61">10</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref62">11</reflink>]) suggested that VR can engage laypeople in the early stages of urban design processes. Kent et al. ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref63">27</reflink>]) developed a VR-based platform for city planning, using Lego bricks to create a tangible interface and generate a visualisation to be viewed with VR glasses. The results showed that the participants were engaged in both the design process and technology use and that the VR visualisation helped them to understand and improve their designs. VR has also been found to enable communication around design concepts. Wingler et al. ([<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref64">53</reflink>]) set up digital mock-ups of three alternative designs for hospital rooms and had nurses wearing HMDs perform a work protocol in each room. The study showed that VR could be used to combine subjective and objective evaluation methods, such as surveys, interviews, and eye-tracking data, to evaluate designs from both functional and aesthetic standpoints. As VR visualisations are comprehensible to adult laypeople, VR may also be a useful tool for engaging pupils in general education in the design of built environments.</p> <p>Except for D'Souza et al.'s ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref65">13</reflink>]) study, the studies cited above involved adult participants, either users or students of architecture, design, and engineering. This indicates a research gap regarding how children and youth make use of digital 3D models and VR when designing built environments. Another characteristic of these studies is that VR was used either in an experimental setting or at a set time in a project. These approaches provided information on the participants' perceptions of and reactions to VR technology but not on how they would choose to utilise it in their processes. The participants in our study chose when and how much they would use immersive VR, which provided information on how pupils in Year 10 include VR in their learning processes.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-6">Methods</hd> <p>Our study was conducted during the Art and crafts lessons for Year 10 (ages 15–16) at a Norwegian school between August 2020 and May 2021, and it included five groups of pupils. We explored how these pupils reflect upon and use floor plan drawings, digital 3D models, and VR in an architectural assignment aimed at supporting their spatial literacy. Data was constructed using qualitative methods, namely semi-structured group interviews and participating observation. The methods are described after establishing the context of the study.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-7">Architectural assignment</hd> <p>The Art and crafts teacher collaborated with a local housing developer for this assignment. The pupils were asked to design shared-living spaces of 50–120 m<sups>2</sups> for a planned ecovillage in the school's vicinity. In this open assignment, the pupils were required to combine at least two functions, such as a shared kitchen, tool shed, greenhouse, training facility, café, or social meeting place with pool tables, gaming consoles, or nooks for reading and knitting. The pupils had to work individually on this assignment and focus on the social and environmental aspects while designing an aesthetically pleasing building. The whole project spanned 9–10 two-hour lessons, as shown in Table 1. The first two lessons constituted the introductory phase, wherein the teacher introduced the task and sustainable approaches to designing built environments. This phase also included a group task of drawing the floor plans for a small 25–30 m<sups>2</sups> house. Using these floor plan drawings, the first author created 3D models in SketchUp, which the pupils viewed using VR. This allowed all the pupils to view full-scale prototypes in VR before deciding if they wished to participate in the research project.</p> <p>Table 1 An overview of the pupils' projects and the data constructed during this study</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left"><p>Lesson</p></th><th align="left"><p>1</p></th><th align="left"><p>2</p></th><th align="left"><p>3</p></th><th align="left"><p>4</p></th><th align="left"><p>5</p></th><th align="left"><p>6</p></th><th align="left"><p>7</p></th><th align="left"><p>8</p></th><th align="left"><p>9</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left"><p>Activity</p></td><td align="left" colspan="2"><p>Introductions to the topic and assignment</p></td><td align="left"><p>Initial planning</p></td><td align="left" colspan="4"><p>Learning SketchUp, making 3D models, viewing models in VR</p></td><td align="left" colspan="2"><p>Completing the product and report</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Product</p></td><td align="left" colspan="2"><p>Guest house</p><p>of 25–30 m<sup>2</sup></p></td><td align="left" colspan="7"><p>Main assignment:</p><p>Shared-living space of 50–120 m<sup>2</sup></p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>Data construction</p></td><td align="left" colspan="7"><p>Participating observation</p></td><td align="left" colspan="2"><p>Participating observation and group interviews</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>In the third lesson, the pupils moved on to the main assignment. They first decided on a concept and drew a floor plan as part of their initial planning, following which they made three-dimensional models to visualise their ideas. The pupils could choose to make their models using Lego, cardboard, Minecraft, or the 3D modelling software SketchUp. Since our research aim was to explore the use of VR and digital 3D models, we focused on the pupils who chose SketchUp. The main author then taught them to use the software and facilitated the use of VR in a room separate from the rest of the class. The pupils were taught the basic functions of SketchUp and an approach that would make it possible to walk through the model in VR. The pupils could also edit their floor plan drawings throughout this process. Some made digital versions, while others drew their floor plans on paper.</p> <p>When creating their models in SketchUp, the pupils were encouraged to view their models in VR at any time. To do this, SketchUp-files were shared with the first author, who prepared the models for VR by uploading them to the cloud-based tool Kubity. By scanning QR codes generated by Kubity with the free KubityGo app, the pupils could view the models on their mobile phones. Some used Google Cardboard VR glasses for an immersive VR experience, and others viewed the models in non-immersive mode (see Fig. 1). The architectural assignment was developed by one of the school's teachers. The first author added the initial VR activity as well as the option to create 3D models in SketchUp and view them using VR.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-8">Roles and access to the school</hd> <p>The first author's primary role was as a researcher, but the role of a teacher was also adopted in two instances: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref66">1</reflink>) when teaching SketchUp and (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref67">2</reflink>) when a substitute teacher was required in the month of February 2021. The second instance was not planned, and although it ensured continued access to the school, constructing data was challenging during this time as responsibilities extended beyond the research participants. Juggling these roles also created ethical challenges, such as keeping the pupils informed.</p> <p>The research project was conducted during a period of severe COVID-19 restrictions. This meant that most of the data construction was conducted via video conferences set up in the classrooms between August 2020 and January 2021 as well as for two weeks in April and one in May. The pupils attended school normally for all lessons. The first author had physical access to the school for one lesson in August 2020 and one in October 2020 and the entire period from February to May 2021.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-9">Participants</hd> <p>Our study took place in a Norwegian lower secondary school during the Art and crafts lessons for Year 10 (ages 15–16). The school is a public school situated in a small city. It enrols pupils from the surrounding areas and is representative of an average Norwegian lower secondary school. As the Art and crafts subject is mandatory, all 90 pupils were included in the five groups. Each pupil[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref68">1</reflink>] decided whether and how they would participate in the research project. The research project was approved by Sikt—Norwegian Agency for Shared Services in Education and Research, which ensured the secure handling of personal data.</p> <p>In this study, we focused on the 23 pupils who chose to work with SketchUp and VR. One of these students did not consent to be interviewed. Four other pupils were not interviewed and did not view their models in VR due to their high workloads during the last stage of the project. Data on these five pupils was constructed only through observation. The sole inclusion criterion was willingness to participate. For some, the desire to learn something new or an interest in 3D modelling or VR was the main motivation, while others participated to spend time with friends. Thus, the participating pupils formed a representative sample of their class but with a slightly greater ambition and interest in technology.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-10">Participating observation</hd> <p>The first author conducted what Cohen et al. ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref69">12</reflink>]) described as unstructured participating observation during 44 of 47 two-hour lessons. A brief introduction was provided in a few of these, and most lessons were observed in their entirety. Through observations, we sought to capture the various ways in which the pupils approached the assignment and how the visualisation methods they used affected their projects.</p> <p>Participating observation provides the opportunity to gain firsthand, authentic data (Cohen et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref70">12</reflink>]). In this study, participation involved answering questions, supervising, teaching, and doing practical chores to help the teacher. Although time consuming, the researcher's long-term participation normalised the situation and helped gain the trust of the participants, as described by Bresler ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref71">5</reflink>]). Using an open approach, unstructured observation was chosen, as it allows 'the elements of the situation speak for themselves' (Cohen et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref72">12</reflink>], p. 544). Observation notes, including pure observations and interpretations, were made as quickly as possible after each lesson. Observations of interest were narrated as episodes, as described by Emerson et al. ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref73">16</reflink>]), with a focus on reconstructing conversations and describing events, behaviours, and activities. The observation notes encompassed 36 single-spaced A4 pages.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-11">Semi-structured group interviews</hd> <p>Towards the end of the project, or soon after finishing, the pupils were interviewed regarding their experiences and were asked to reflect on what they had learned. Six interviews were conducted with a total of 18 pupils, who were divided into groups of 2–4. The interviews were recorded and orthographically transcribed, which resulted in 54 single-spaced A4 pages. Relevant quotes were translated from Norwegian to English by the first author.</p> <p>The semi-structured interviews allowed for covering a sequence of predetermined themes and questions as well as for asking follow-up questions and adapting them (Brinkmann & Kvale, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref74">6</reflink>]; Bryman, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref75">7</reflink>]), for example, to the observations of each pupil's process. The participants were unfamiliar with the setting, and some were anxious before the interviews. However, the interviews resembled normal, relaxed conversations, as described by Brinkmann and Kvale ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref76">6</reflink>]), so the pupils appeared comfortable and spoke freely. The interviews were held in groups because the literature state that group dynamics may lead to fluent conversations that allow informants to build upon and discuss each other's statements (Brinkmann & Kvale, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref77">6</reflink>]; Bryman, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref78">7</reflink>]).</p> <p>An interview guide was designed with the aim of letting the pupils speak freely about their experiences, and it started with asking them to describe how they felt about working with the project. The main part of the interview concerned their experiences with the visualisation methods; the pupils were asked what they felt about working with 3D models and VR, whether these tools helped them understand the spatial properties of their designs or if they also used other approaches, and whether any discoveries that arose from viewing their designs in 3D and VR led them to make changes to their initial draft. Finally, we focused on how they regard their own spatial literacy and the perceived learning outcomes of the project, as well as how the project could have been improved to better support their learning. The aim was to capture the pupils' reflections on their use of visualisation tools.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-12">Data analysis</hd> <p>The analysis of the interview transcripts and observation notes drew on a thematic interview analysis in three stages, as described by Langdridge ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref79">31</reflink>]) and King and Horrocks ([<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref80">29</reflink>]). As the combined material encompassed 90 A4 pages, the software NVivo was used for the first two stages of the analysis, and the last stage was performed manually using pen and paper. We started with <emph>descriptive coding</emph>, during which we familiarised ourselves with the material and then commented on and labelled it with descriptive codes. Although we use the term 'descriptive coding' here, in line with the chosen analytical framework (King & Horrocks, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref81">29</reflink>]; Langdridge, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref82">31</reflink>]), some of these codes were formulated similarly to In Vivo coding, using language derived from the participants (see Table 2). This technique was chosen to preserve the participants' expressions and simultaneously be more evocative, as stated by Saldaña ([<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref83">47</reflink>]). The next step, <emph>interpretive coding</emph>, involved grouping these descriptive codes into clusters. Following the advice of Langdridge ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref84">31</reflink>]), these groups evolved from the empirical material; similar descriptive codes were clustered together and given labels based on our interpretation of the content. Finally, these interpretive codes were further grouped and elevated to a greater level of abstraction when we <emph>defined the overarching themes</emph>. These themes drew on the theoretical perspective of spatial literacy and were related to the research question, as they referred to the various ways in which the pupils used the visualisations tools.</p> <p>Table 2 Examples from the process of thematic coding</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th align="left"><p>Raw data</p></th><th align="left"><p>Descriptive code</p></th><th align="left"><p>Interpretative code</p></th><th align="left"><p>Overarching theme</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left"><p>It became apparent that it was not enough space between the sink and toilet, they experienced that they could not fit their legs if they were to sit down on the toilet</p><p>(excerpt from observation notes)</p></td><td align="left"><p>Embodied experience</p></td><td align="left" rowspan="2"><p>Experiencing sizes in VR</p></td><td align="left" rowspan="4"><p>Immersing in a full-scale three-dimensional environment</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>You get another perspective on how it looks, how large it is, and these kinds of things</p><p>(excerpt from interview transcription)</p></td><td align="left"><p>New perspective on sizes</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>It was a different way of seeing things, by using VR, when.. You felt like you were there without being there</p><p>(excerpt from interview transcription)</p></td><td align="left"><p>Being there</p></td><td align="left" rowspan="2"><p>VR as seeing the building in real life</p></td></tr><tr><td align="left"><p>[the class] express that VR gave a quite realistic image of how the buildings would look like in real life</p><p>(excerpt from observation notes)</p></td><td align="left"><p>Realistic, real-life image</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>In the following section, we present interview excerpts and observation notes that represent the overarching themes. Rather than summarising the statements of all participants, we chose excerpts that provide rich descriptions and allow for further discussion. Although data from only 10 of the 23 participants are included, we have chosen excerpts that we believe mirror the group's opinions, unless otherwise mentioned. The participants have been given pseudonyms.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-13">Six identified themes</hd> <p>In this study, we explored how pupils reflect upon and use floor plan drawings, digital 3D models, and VR in an architectural assignment aimed at supporting their spatial literacy. Through the analysis, we identified six themes related to the activities the three visualisation tools facilitated: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref85">1</reflink>) <emph>translating from two to three dimensions, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref86">2</reflink>) switching between floor plan drawings and viewing in VR, (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref87">3</reflink>) experiencing sizes and generating ideas while modelling, (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref88">4</reflink>) immersing in a full-scale 3D-environment, (<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref89">5</reflink>) collaborating and discussing with peers,</emph> and (<emph>6) viewing only the final product in VR</emph>. These are presented below.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-14">Translating from two to three dimensions</hd> <p>The pupils approached the drawing of floor plans in different ways. Some pupils expressed that they faced no difficulties with this task, whereas other pupils stated in the interviews that they had struggled with the task because it was difficult to gauge the suitable dimensions to use. In his interview, James said that he had started over several times and never really felt satisfied. In another interview, Daniel indicated that he had only managed to draw a square shape for the shared-living space on his initial floor plan, with no rooms inside the space, even though the teacher had instructed them to avoid designing simple box-shaped buildings and aim for more complex, interesting shapes. He struggled to translate between the two-dimensional drawing and the three-dimensional building it represented and was thus unable to get started with the design process. During the observation, the first author saw that several students used the strategy of distributing the allotted square meters into an interesting shape. They related their work to the number of squares on the grid paper and did not necessarily imagine what they were drawing in three dimensions. However, several of the pupils struggled to work with the correct scale. The teacher had printed out floor plan symbols in the correct scale, but many pupils chose to draw by hand rather than cutting and pasting the printouts. Some of the pupils drew the furniture too large or too small, which indicates that they did not relate the symbols to actual furniture in an actual space. This was especially apparent with one of the pupils, who answered in an unstructured interview that he considered it necessary to fill up his very large room and did so simply by enlarging the furniture. These examples show that the pupils who did not seem to have well-developed spatial literacy were not stimulated by the floor plans to imagine their built environment in three dimensions or reflect over the spatial properties the drawings represented.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-15">Switching between floor plan drawings and viewing in VR</hd> <p>In the introductory group task, the pupils drew floor plans for a small guest house, which the first author used to make 3D models. While viewing these models in VR during the second lesson, the pupils were instructed to think about how the drafts could be improved. In a 10-min session following this, each group received a copy of their floor plan, on which they drew improvements using a coloured pencil (see Fig. 2). One of the groups quickly identified the hallway of their guest house as an area to improve, as a corner stuck out and hindered the line of sight to the living room's large windows. By shifting the position of the bathroom by 2.5 m<sups>2</sups>, they could replace this corner with a slanted wall that created an opening between the rooms. This was only a short exercise, but viewing their model in VR seemed to spark ideas for alternative solutions for this group, who even asked for new grid paper to redraw the building from scratch with improved solutions. Since VR displays a realistic prototype in three dimensions, it seemed to enable the pupils to easily identify issues related to the overall feeling of the space as well as come up with ideas to solve these issues. The understanding the pupils gained was something they seemed to be able to bring back to the floor plans. Going back and forth between the floor plan drawings and VR the way the pupils did in this introductory task might help them to understand what the floor plan represents and support their ability to shift between two and three dimensions.</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 2 Left: Floor plan drawing of the small guesthouse, with the ground floor to the left and a loft to the right; the original floor plan is shown in grey lines, and the group's changes are drawn on top using red pencil. Right: A screenshot from the 3D model the pupils viewed in VR, which illustrate how the corner of the bathroom hindered the view of the living room</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-16">Experiencing sizes and generating ideas while modelling</hd> <p>During the interviews, several pupils stated that it was easier to imagine the building as soon as they started modelling it in SketchUp and that this process helped them generate new ideas and make decisions. This was also the case for Daniel, who did not manage to draw more than a square on the floor plan. When he started modelling, he was able to design a building with 'more of a shape to it', as he described it. When asked why, he answered as follows:Daniel: Because in SketchUp, I could see more how it would turn out.First author: Did you actually find it a bit difficult—the one on paper [the floor plan]?Daniel: Yes, it was difficult to imagine how it would turn out, yeah.</p> <p>Likewise, Anna described how moving on from drawing floor plans to 3D modelling helped her in the design process: 'Yes, I tried in the beginning, but I didn't know exactly what I was thinking there. It is so much easier to imagine it when you can see it in SketchUp, I feel.'</p> <p>The pupils' responses are not surprising: a floor plan drawing is a projection and, at the same time, an abstraction in both scale and dimension, whereas SketchUp shows a representation that is much closer to actual built environments. From what the pupils expressed in the interviews, it was clear that they found the SketchUp representations easier to understand as soon as they added walls and made it three-dimensional, without necessarily adding details to make the representation realistic. Some of the pupils handed in a simple 3D model without any furnishing and with walls in the standard white material. Others added a lot of details to their models, as shown in Fig. 3. Ben mentioned that the furnishing was the most fun part of the project. Several pupils also stated that the furnishing helped them understand the spatial properties of their built environments, as they could see how familiar objects, such as a bed or a sofa, related to the size of a room or how much furniture they could fit.</p> <p>Graph: Fig. 3 Examples of detailed 3D models of shared-living spaces designed by the pupils in this study</p> <p>Lisa, a pupil who faced few challenges during the assignment, stated during the interview that she leveraged SketchUp's fluidity in scale and perspective to view the model as if she were inside the house. She stated, '[W]hen you zoomed in so that it is straight on, you can also see quite well how the sizes are'. This shows that the process of modelling provided different ways for the pupils to reflect on the spatial properties of the built environment they were designing.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-17">Immersing in a full-scale three-dimensional environment</hd> <p>The pupils had the option of viewing their models in VR at any time during the modelling process. When asked to describe their experiences with VR, Anna and Ben answered as follows:Anna: Yeah, well... It was nice to see because then I got to see heights and whether things were too big or too small, and things like that.Ben: Mm. Yes, I completely agree. You got a perspective on how it turns out.Anna: Yes.Ben: It actually helped me a bit to see.. Yeah, here it could perhaps be a little bit bigger if it was too narrow a hallway. And also, yeah.. It is very cool to see it in VR because it's a bit of the future, the digital, so it is fun to have tried something that's kind of.. Yeah, that can be the future.First author: So, you mostly used it to see the sizes?Anna: Yes.Ben: Yes, during the process. But it will be fun to see it when it's finished. It's going to be fun to see it then, because then you get a feeling that you are actually there, for real.</p> <p>The first thing that Anna and Ben mentioned when describing their VR experience was that they gained an understanding of the spatial properties of their models, especially the heights of the built environments and the sizes of the rooms. For Ben, seeing a realistic representation of his finished building and his enthusiasm for trying a technology he believes to be the future were also mixed into this. Although both SketchUp and immersive VR supported the pupils' understanding of spatial properties, the latter was mentioned as the most helpful tool when the pupils compared the two. During an interview, Peter said that seeing the whole house in both SketchUp and VR helped him understand the dimensions of the building. Simon disagreed and stated, 'I find it difficult when you're in SketchUp to see the size of it. [...] You get a bit lost. [...] It is easier when you see it in VR because then you are inside there'. In a different interview, James summed up the experience as follows: 'On the floor plan, it was most difficult to see how, yeah. And then in SketchUp, you could see it clearly, but in VR, you saw it most clearly, because you were inside the model, it felt like.' On two separate occasions, Simon and James stated that VR provided them with a better understanding of spatial properties than SketchUp did. The opportunity to be immersed in a three-dimensional environment and view the model as if they were inside it was a central benefit that allowed them to evaluate the sizes of the building as if they were in a real, full-scale built environment.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-18">Collaborating and discussing with peers</hd> <p>During the group task of planning a small guest house, the pupils saw their design solutions in VR for the first time. This seemed to be an experience the pupils found fun and interesting, as they could see how their ideas worked through realistic, three-dimensional visualisations and also understand how other pupils had solved the same design problem. On their own accord, pupils started to 'visit' the other groups' buildings. Since most of the pupils walked through all the models, they could discuss each other's solutions:Three boys are gathered in a corner of the classroom, talking and laughing loudly. As I walk closer, I can hear them talking about how one of their groups decided to use a ladder instead of a staircase between the two floors, something that the other two mention as remarkable. The pupil justifies this choice as area efficient, while the other two laugh and point out the difficulty of climbing up and down. They suggested a spiral staircase instead, even though this would demand a larger area. (Excerpt from observation notes, 24 February, 2021)</p> <p>The first author initially thought that these boys were having a personal conversation, as they were quite loud and rowdy, but instead they were discussing architectural solutions, weighing area efficiency against user friendliness. They did not seem to have any difficulties with understanding the other groups' ideas, as they were able to skip interpretative questions and, instead, have a lively discussion about concrete solutions. As an introductory lesson to the design of built environments, the main goal of this activity was to provide the pupils with some experience with translating between different scales and two and three dimensions as well as with solving architectural design problems. The engagement created by the VR session allowed the pupils to voluntarily see and discuss each other's solutions, giving them more diverse experiences than viewing only their own models would.</p> <p>After moving on to the individual, main assignment of designing shared-living spaces of 50–120 m<sups>2</sups>, the pupils showed varying interest in viewing each other's models, and most pupils only viewed their own. James, Katie, and Lisa, who worked on the assignment in the same research group, said that they had all visited each other's models. The lesson in which they viewed the guest houses had dedicated time for VR walkthroughs. Each pupil viewed their model while the rest were working on their individual assignments. This meant that viewing classmates' models necessitated taking a break from their own work. The group dynamics and the pupils' level of engagement in each other's projects may explain the variations between the groups. Nevertheless, VR's potential for sharing designs with others is clear from this excerpt:Ben views his model in VR while narrating what he is doing. He says that he wishes to check a hallway and that he's been worrying about it being too small but comments that it's all right. When he puts down the VR glasses, Anna asks him how the hallway turned out. Ben replies that she could just check it out herself and passes the VR glasses to Anna. After Anna had a look, the two of them briefly discuss the size of the hallway and agree that it works well at this size. (Excerpt from observation notes, 16 September, 2020)</p> <p>Instead of answering Anna's question directly, Ben chose to let her see the hallway in question. Thus, the two pupils had a shared experience of the room as grounds for a brief discussion. Even though Ben had already concluded that he was happy with the size of the room, this afforded him confirmation from a classmate that his evaluation was correct. A part of being spatially literate entails communicating about spatial objects and relationships; therefore, we regard the way VR stimulated collaborative discussions as supporting the pupils' spatial literacy.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-19">Viewing only the final product in VR</hd> <p>This architectural assignment was planned to be an iterative process through which pupils could utilise VR to assess the different stages of their designs for the shared-living space. It was possible to 'walk through' the model as soon as the walls were drawn in the first or second lesson of modelling, which would allow the pupils to evaluate the sizes of the rooms and easily make large adjustments. However, of the 23 pupils who made 3D models, only Ben viewed his 3D model in VR more than once, and most pupils used VR only towards the end of their projects. After the first viewing of her model, Olivia stated that she wished to view the model again to evaluate the changes she had planned to make. However, she did not proceed with a second walkthrough—something the first author brought up during an unstructured interview:The first author asked if she found it troublesome, if she felt like she had run out of time, or if there were other reasons for not trying [VR] again. Olivia said that she actually got enough out of it the first time and felt like there was no need to check more. She took what she had learned the first time with her into her further work and one time was sufficient. She added that it was not troublesome; it was just that she did not feel the need for it after all. (Excerpt from observation notes, 12 May, 2021)</p> <p>The first time she used VR, Olivia spent a relatively long time, perhaps up to 10 min, walking through her model and thoroughly evaluating the size of every room. She then decided to make big changes to the layout of the rooms—something she had initially wanted to evaluate in VR. It seemed as though she brought that understanding of the space with her throughout the process, even if most of the rooms had changed. As previously mentioned, some pupils stated that working in SketchUp helped them understand the spatial properties of their buildings. This might have also contributed to Olivia's feeling of having a sufficient understanding of her model.</p> <p>None of the pupils took the initiative to view their models in VR during the process of designing but were prompted by the first author, often repeatedly, to do so. The pupils seemed to want to finish their models as much as possible before viewing them in VR, and they tended to add details that were not necessary for evaluating the overall building. The observation notes contained several examples of this; for example, Charlotte and Daniel stated that there was not much to view, as they had just begun the furnishing process. Ben had added large pieces of furniture to his model but wished to add some plants and pictures to the walls. James agreed to view his model in one of the last lessons before handing it in but wished to work more on it first:James says that it's okay [to view the model in VR], but he wishes to add more to the model and gets the opportunity to do so. There are many details to add and James expresses his wish to make everything perfect. He has figured out how to edit models downloaded from SketchUp's Warehouse and has now elongated the furnace pipe from a freestanding fireplace. He wishes to create a bend in the pipe so that it goes into the wall and asks how it can be done. (Excerpt from observation notes, 9 February, 2021)</p> <p>During an interview, James stated that he 'never really felt like he had worked enough on the model to use VR to see how it ended up', which illustrates his wish to see a finished result in VR rather than a work in progress. This might have been influenced by the way VR can show realistic prototypes of finished buildings, which was mentioned by some pupils as a positive aspect of the project. This might have led to the pupils wanting to view a model resembling a finished building, in turn causing them to add small details before their walkthroughs (see Fig. 3), rather than utilising the walkthrough at an early stage.</p> <p>A consequence of using VR late in the process was that it made the models more cumbersome to edit. Most of the pupils still made some changes to their models of the shared-living space after the walkthrough; they changed the layout and sizes of the rooms, moved furniture around, added windows, and corrected errors, such as lowering a floor that had been placed too high. However, at least one pupil, Anna, stated that it was difficult to imagine changes because the model looked finished.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-20">Discussion</hd> <p>The pupils participating in this study expressed that it was challenging to relate two-dimensional floor plan drawings to imagined three-dimensional, full-scale built environments. In contrast, the 3D models, especially when viewed in VR, helped them to understand and reflect on the spatial properties of what they were designing. This is not surprising, considering that these visualisations gradually became similar to actual built environments in realism, scale, and perspective. This is also in line with findings from previous studies. While the 3D and VR both were three-dimensional representations, what separated them was the fluidity in scale and perspective. In SketchUp, it was possible to zoom in and out and view a model from different perspectives, whereas in VR, a model could only be viewed in full scale, as if you were inside the building. One pupil, Lisa, said that she utilised SketchUp's fluidity in scale and perspective to view the model as if she were inside the house while modelling, while others sometimes lost track of where they were due to zooming in or out too much. Simon mentioned getting lost in SketchUp—a challenge that D'Souza et al. ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref90">13</reflink>]) claimed was the reason for so few of their participants reaching an ideal design solution in their three-dimensional environment.</p> <p>In VR, the model is viewed from a familiar point of view. Both James and Simon made it clear that they preferred VR because of the feeling of being inside the model. This level of immersion opened up new possibilities for understanding spatial properties, such as by gauging sizes against one's own body. Similar possibilities were identified in a study by Jetter et al. ([<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref91">24</reflink>]), wherein professional interaction designers used immersive VR to perform various design exercises. The participants were observed to move around their design drafts to experience size relations. One evaluated the size of a design by referencing his own body height, and another commented that it 'was a very natural way to experience distances' (Jetter et al., [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref92">24</reflink>], p. 7). As the use of Cardboard VR in our study did not allow for observing the participants' interactions with their virtual environment, we do not know if they approached it similarly. However, the way they emphasised the feeling of being inside the model does suggest some embodied understanding of it. Our participants' statements about immersive VR being the most helpful to understand spatial properties is also in line with the findings of Paes et al.'s ([<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref93">44</reflink>]) study. Their participants were able to judge distances more accurately and gain a better perception of the building in immersive VR than in non-immersive VR. This suggests that VR has great potential to facilitate one's engagement with the spatial properties of a three-dimensional design. This kind of engagement can support pupils' spatial literacy.</p> <p>Although interpreting floor plan drawings may be challenging for many lower secondary school pupils, it is important for them to learn to read such common visualisations. In our study, we saw that switching between viewing a floor plan drawing and a model of the same building helped the pupils to make sense of the floor plan. This supports the findings of Kandi et al.'s ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref94">26</reflink>]) study, in which the participants were able to transfer knowledge about the spatial properties of a building from immersive VR to two-dimensional drawings. Thus, switching between these visualisation forms can support an individual's ability to translate between two and three dimensions as well as between different scales.</p> <p>The outcomes of our study are in line with the findings of previous research on the use of VR in the design of built environments and were, therefore, expected. However, the participants in our study were reluctant to view their models in VR and tended to wait until the end of their projects to do so. We did not find similar outcomes in other studies, as most researchers have used VR either in an experimental setting or at a set time during a project. In the following section, we discuss the possible explanations for this reluctance and the postponed use of VR.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-21">Virtual Reality as a tool for presentations rather than for the process?</hd> <p>There was a clear tendency for the participating pupils to delay viewing their models in VR until they reached the end of the project, despite displaying positive attitudes towards VR. Only Ben used VR more than once, and all pupils used VR only after being prompted to do so by the first author. Several of the pupils expressed a wish to add more details to their models so that there would be more to see, and both Ben and James expressed that they wished to see how the building 'ended up' in VR. These accounts suggest that the pupils perceived VR more as a tool for seeing a presentation of their finished building rather than as a tool for evaluating their designs throughout the process. While we have not seen this described by other authors, the first author has observed the same tendency in a small study on engineering students' utilisation of VR (Strand et al., [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref95">49</reflink>]). In the previous study, two of the three observed groups waited until the end of the project to view their models in VR so that they could see how their buildings would turn out when finished. A few of the students also regarded it as a fun reward after hard work (Strand et al., [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref96">49</reflink>]). Although the pupils in the current study had positive views of VR, the perception of VR as a presentation tool may have hindered them from using it to aid their designing process.</p> <p>Our empirical material did not offer any clear indications for why the pupils may have perceived VR as a presentation tool. Nevertheless, we wish to suggest a few possible explanations. One explanation draws from their earlier experiences. Most pupils had experienced computer-based gaming in one way or another. In <emph>Minecraft</emph>, the user is involved in building various environments using Lego-like bricks, while videogames such as <emph>Fortnite</emph> have far more realistic environments, but the gamer is <emph>not</emph> involved in building. The pupils were most likely unfamiliar with building realistic digital environments, so their reluctance to use VR in the design process might be explained by their lack of training. It is also possible that the pupils were more excited about seeing the finished version of their buildings in VR than using it during the design process, perhaps even wanting to delay the experience, which was indicated by their wish to add as much detail as possible before viewing their models in VR. This explanation may be seen in relation to one of Halabi's ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref97">18</reflink>]) findings, whose study involved first-year engineering students designing a kitchen. The students described seeing their designs in VR as a materialisation of their ideas, as if each kitchen had actually been built (Halabi, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref98">18</reflink>]). Since VR visualisation was the closest they would get to realising their design, it may have caused them to regard VR as a tool for presenting the final result. The process of modelling was also something several of the pupils in our study seemed to enjoy, and Ben even mentioned that furnishing was the most fun part of the assignment. The so-called <emph>Warehouse</emph> in SketchUp offers a large range of pre-modelled furniture that many of the pupils found great joy in downloading and adding to their buildings. The pupils might have found this so enjoyable that they were reluctant to pursue a different activity. Moreover, the participating pupils stated that 3D modelling was useful for understanding the designs they created, even if they regarded VR as a better visualisation tool for understanding spatial properties. In addition, Lisa, one of the participants, viewed her model in SketchUp as if she were inside the house and thus used SketchUp as both a modelling software and a non-immersive VR environment. It is possible that the pupils regarded the SketchUp view as sufficient during the process and did not perceive the use of immersive VR as necessary. A final possible explanation is that the pupils associated VR with fun and games, as it is commonly used for gaming and entertainment purposes. Ben used the word 'fun' when talking about VR, and a level of excitement and enthusiasm was noticeable in the classroom when the research project and the use of VR were presented to the pupils. This may have led the pupils to overlook how it can be incorporated into their assignment.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-22">Utilisation of VR hindered by its perceived finishedness?</hd> <p>Since the pupils in this study viewed their models in VR late in the process, many of the VR visualisations were detailed and realistic. While previous studies have highlighted the ability to make realistic prototypes as one of the advantages of using VR in design processes (Chowdhury & Schnabel, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref99">11</reflink>]; Halabi, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref100">18</reflink>]; Jetter et al., [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref101">24</reflink>]), we see this as having some problematic effects. First, knowing that VR would show a realistic representation of how their built environments would look in reality may have led the pupils to want to use it towards the end of the process, rather than using it to understand the dimensions they were working with throughout the design process. Furthermore, it was difficult for some pupils to imagine making changes to a model that looked finished, as Anna expressed after viewing her model in VR. We can link this to the term <emph>perceived finishedness</emph>. Bresciani ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref102">4</reflink>]) developed a framework to discuss the affordances of visualisations and their effects on design thinking sessions, in which <emph>perceived finishedness</emph> is presented as one of seven dimensions. It is defined as 'the extent to which visual cues suggest whether an object appears finished' (Bresciani, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref103">4</reflink>], p. 104). The level of perceived finishedness of a draft strongly influences an individual's willingness to make changes to it, regardless of its actual modifiability. A 3D model viewed in VR can actualise this dimension, as the level of detail and immersive environment may lead the viewer to perceive it as finished. However, a 3D model is easily modifiable, and in the present scenario, the pupils could have quickly moved walls to change the layout and sizes of the rooms, whereas sketches and drawings required the pupils to start from scratch. Although most of the pupils made some changes to their models after viewing them in VR, these were small improvements rather than changes to the overall concept. The issue of perceived finishedness highlights the ambiguity related to VR's level of detail and realistic representation. While VR helped the pupils understand the spatial properties and overall appearance of their design drafts, it also prevented them from generating ideas for improvement and, instead, led them to declare their designs as finished. This may have limited the pupils' engagement with the spatial properties of their designs and, in turn, how they developed their spatial literacy through the assignment.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-23">Concluding remarks</hd> <p>In this study, we explored how pupils reflect upon and use floor plan drawings, digital 3D models, and VR in an architectural assignment aimed at supporting their spatial literacy. We identified that it was difficult for several pupils to translate between two- and three-dimensional visualisations and thus relate their floor plan drawings to an imagined built environment. Switching between floor plan drawings and viewing the same buildings in VR seemed to support the pupils in making this translation. The pupils stated that both three-dimensional visualisations helped them reflect on the spatial properties of the built environment they were designing, but the VR visualisation especially allowed them to immerse themselves in the three-dimensional environment. Furthermore, the VR walkthroughs stimulated the pupils' collaborative discussions, thus supporting their ability to communicate about spatial objects and relationships. The main contributions of this study are our reflections on how the pupils tended to use VR to a lesser extent than we expected, and mostly towards the end of the project. This means that the VR's potential for supporting their spatial literacy was not fully utilised. It is possible that the pupils perceived VR as a tool for viewing the final outcomes of their finished project, rather than for evaluating their designs throughout the process, and that the utilisation of VR was hindered by the perceived finishedness of the VR visualisation. An important takeaway from this study is that educators who wish to use VR to support their pupils' spatial literacy need to consider how to implement it throughout a process, as pupils might be hesitant to use VR despite having positive experiences from its use and being enthusiastic about the technology.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-24">Recommendations for further research</hd> <p>The pupils in our study viewed their models in VR during a late stage of the project, and the walkthrough did not stimulate them to work on large changes. This can, at least in part, be explained by the VR visualisations providing realistic representations of their models, with a high level of perceived finishedness. SketchUp allows a user to choose from a range of styles that affect how a model is displayed, without changing its geometry. This includes styles that emulate hand-drawn sketches. We recommend conducting further research into whether the use of such styles can help users perceive their models as drafts open to changes when modelling in SketchUp and, if possible, viewing them in VR. An alternative is to limit the level of detail in a model before a VR walkthrough to see how this affects pupils' levels of understanding and the perceived finishedness of the model.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-25">Funding</hd> <p>Open access funding provided by OsloMet - Oslo Metropolitan University.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-26">Declarations</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0187094068-27">Conflict of interest</hd> <p>The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.</p> <hd id="AN0187094068-28">Publisher's Note</hd> <p>Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p> <ref id="AN0187094068-29"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref26" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Baus O, Bouchard S. Moving from virtual reality exposure-based therapy to augmented reality exposure-based therapy: A review. Frontiers in Human Neurosci-Ence. 2014. 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00112</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref17" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Berkan ST, Öztaş SK, Kara Fİ, Vardar AE. The role of spatial ability on architecture education. Design and Technology Education: an International Journal. 2020; 25; 3: 103-126</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref22" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Bhatt M, Schultz CAmmon S, Capdevila-Werning R. People-centered visuospatial cognition: Next-generation architectural design systems and their role in design conception, computing, and communication. The active image: Architecture and engineering in the age of modeling. 2017; Springer International Publishing: 207-232. 10.1007/978-3-319-56466-1; 28</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref88" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Bresciani S. Visual design thinking: A collaborative dimensions framework to profile visualisations. Design Studies. 2019; 63: 92-124. 10.1016/j.destud.2019.04.001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref71" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Bresler L. Ethical issues in the conduct and communication of ethnographic classroom research. Studies in Art Education. 1996; 37; 3: 133-144. 10.2307/1320707</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref74" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Brinkmann S, Kvale S. InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. 2015; SAGE Publications</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref75" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Bryman A. Social research methods. 20165; Oxford University Press</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref12" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Buckley J, Seery N, Canty D. A heuristic framework of spatial ability: A review and synthesis of spatial factor literature to support its translation into STEM education. Educational Psychology Review. 2018; 30; 3: 947-972. 10.1007/s10648-018-9432-z</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref60" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Chowdhury, S, & Schnabel, M. A. (2018). Communication and participation in virtual envi-ronments: Towards a parametric participatory urban design decision-making platform. In P. Rajagopalan & M.M Andamon (Eds.). Engaging Architectural Science: Meeting the Challenges of Higher Density: 52nd International Conference of the Architectural Science Association 2018, The Architectural Science Association and RMIT Univer-sity. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2019.00097.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chowdhury S, Schnabel MA. Laypeople's collaborative immersive Virtual Re-ality design discourse in neighborhood design. Front Robot A. 2019; I: 6. 10.3389/frobt.2019.00097</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chowdhury S, Schnabel MA. Virtual environments as medium for laypeople to communicate and collaborate in urban design. Architectural Science Review. 2020; 63; 5: 451-464. 10.1080/00038628.2020.1806031</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cohen L, Manion L, Morrison K. Research methods in education. 20188; Routledge</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> D'Souza N, Yoon S-Y, Islam Z. Understanding design skills of the generation Y: An exploration through the VR-KiDS project. Design Studies. 2011; 32; 2: 180-209. 10.1016/j.destud.2010.07.002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dewey J. Experience and education. 1938; Macmillan</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dorta T, Kinayoglu G, Boudhraâ S. A new representational ecosystem for design teaching in the studio. Design Studies. 2016; 47: 164-186. 10.1016/j.destud.2016.09.003</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Emerson RM, Fretz RI, Shaw LL. Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. 20112; University of Chicago Press</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Häkkilä J, Colley A, Väyrynen J, Yliharju A-J. Introducing virtual reality technologies to design education. Seminar.net: Media, Technology & Life-Long Learning. 2018; 14; 1: 1-12. 10.7577/seminar.2584</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Halabi O. Immersive virtual reality to enforce teaching in engineering education. Multimedia Tools and Applications. 2020; 79; 3–4: 2987-3004. 10.1007/s11042-019-08214-8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hartless JF, Ayer SK, London JS, Wu W. Comparison of building design assessment behaviors of novices in augmented- and virtual-reality environments. Journal of Architectural Engineering. 2020; 26; 2: 1-11. 10.1061/(ASCE)AE.1943-5568.0000396</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hettithanthri U, Hansen P. Design studio practice in the context of architectural education: A narrative literature review. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 2022; 32; 4: 2343-2364. 10.1007/s10798-021-09694-2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Huber AM, Waxman LK, Dyar C. Using systems thinking to understand the evolving role of technology in the design process. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 2022; 32; 1: 447-477. 10.1007/s10798-020-09590-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ilić M, Đukić A. Typology of spatial ability tests and its implementation in architectural study entrance exams. Facta Universitatis—Series: Architecture and Civil Engineering. 2017; 15; 1: 1-14. 10.2298/FUACE161113001I</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jensen CG. Collaboration and dialogue in virtual reality. Journal of Problem Based Learning in Higher Education. 2017; 5; 1: 85-110. 10.5278/ojs.jpblhe.v0i0.1542</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jetter, H.-C, Rädle, R, Feuchtner, T, Anthes, C, Friedl, J, & Klokmose, C. N. (2020). "In VR, everything is possible!": Sketching and simulating spatially-aware interactive spaces in Virtual Reality. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (pp. 1–16, Article 3376652). https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376652.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Julià C, Antolí JÒ. Spatial ability learning through educational robotics. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 2016; 26; 2: 185-203. 10.1007/s10798-015-9307-2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kandi VR, Castronovo F, Brittle P, Ventura SM, Nikolic D. Assessing the impact of a construction virtual reality game on design review skills of construction students. Journal of Architectural Engineering. 2020; 26; 4: 1-11. 10.1061/(ASCE)AE.1943-5568.0000434</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kent L, Snider C, Hicks BDe Paolis LT, Bourdot P. Engaging citizens with urban planning using city blocks, a mixed reality design and visualisation platform. Augmented reality, virtual reality, and computer graphics. 2019; Springer International Publishing: 51-62. 10.1007/978-3-030-25999-0_5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kim KG, Oertel C, Dobricki M, Olsen JK, Coppi AE, Cattaneo A, Dillenbourg P. Using immersive virtual reality to support designing skills in vocational education. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2020; 51; 6: 2199-2213. 10.1111/bjet.13026</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> King N, Horrocks C. Interviews in qualitative research. 2010; Sage</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lane D, Lynch R, McGarr O. Problematizing spatial literacy within the school curriculum. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 2019; 29; 4: 685-700. 10.1007/s10798-018-9467-y</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Langdridge D. Psykologisk forskningsmetode: en innføring i kvalitative og kvantitative tilnærminger [Introduction to research methods and data analysis in psychology]. 2006; Tapir</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lohman, D. F. (1979). Spatial ability: A review and reanalysis of the correlational literature (Vol. 8, p. 226). C. S. o. e. Stanford, Stanford university.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ma M, Zheng HBrahnam S, Jain LC. Virtual reality and serious games in healthcare. Advanced computational intelligence paradigms in healthcare 6. Virtual reality in psychotherapy, rehabilitation, and assessment. 2011; Springer, Berlin Heidelberg: 169-192. 10.1007/978-3-642-17824-5_9</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Maas MJ, Hughes JM. Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality in K–12 education: A review of the literature. Technology, Pedagogy and Education. 2020; 29; 2: 231-249. 10.1080/1475939X.2020.1737210</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Macnab W, Johnstone AH. Spatial skills which contribute to competence in the biological sciences. Journal of Biological Education. 1990; 24; 1: 37-41. 10.1080/00219266.1990.9655099</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McGee MG. Human spatial abilities: Psychometric studies and environmental, genetic, hormonal, and neurological influences. Psychological Bulletin. 1979; 86; 5: 889-918. 10.1037/0033-2909.86.5.889</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mejia-Puig L, Chandrasekera T. The virtual body in a design exercise: A conceptual framework for embodied cognition. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 2022; 33: 1861-1882. 10.1007/s10798-022-09793-8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moore-Russo D, Viglietti JM, Chiu MM, Bateman SM. Teachers' spatial literacy as visualization, reasoning, and communication. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2013; 29: 97-109. 10.1016/j.tate.2012.08.012</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nielsen LM. Design education of the lay client. Information Design Journal. 2003; 11; 2–3: 184-188. 10.1075/idj.11.2.16nie</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nielsen LM, Digranes IBohemia E, Hilton K, McMahon C, Clarke A. User participation—Real influence or hostage taking?. Shaping the future? The 9th engineering & product design education international conference. 2007; Northumbria University: 305-310</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nisha B. The pedagogic value of learning design with Virtual Reality. Educational Psychology. 2019; 39; 10: 1233-1254. 10.1080/01443410.2019.1661356</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2020b). Art and crafts (KHV01‑02) Competence aims and assessment Competence aims after Year 10. https://<ulink href="http://www.udir.no/lk20/khv01-02/kompetansemaal-og-vurdering/kv159?lang=eng">www.udir.no/lk20/khv01-02/kompetansemaal-og-vurdering/kv159?lang=eng</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2020a). Art and crafts (KHV01‑02) Competence aims and assessment Competence aims after Year 4. https://<ulink href="http://www.udir.no/lk20/khv01-02/kompetansemaal-og-vurdering/kv157?lang=eng">www.udir.no/lk20/khv01-02/kompetansemaal-og-vurdering/kv157?lang=eng</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Paes D, Irizarry J, Pujoni D. An evidence of cognitive benefits from immersive design review: Comparing three-dimensional perception and presence between immersive and non-immersive virtual environments. Automation in Construction. 2021; 130: 103849. 10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103849</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Parveau M, Adda M. 3iVClass: A new classification method for virtual, augmented and mixed realities. Procedia Computer Science. 2018; 141: 263-270. 10.1016/j.procs.2018.10.180</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Planning and Building Act. (2008). The planning and building act (LOV-2008–06–27–71). Government.no. https://<ulink href="http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dokumenter/planning-building-act/id570450/">www.regjeringen.no/en/dokumenter/planning-building-act/id570450/</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Saldaña J. The coding manual for qualitative researchers. 20163; Sage</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sopher H, Gewirtzman DF, Kalay YE. Going immersive in a community of learners? Assessment of design processes in a multi-setting architecture studio. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2019; 50; 5: 2109-2128. 10.1111/bjet.12857</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Strand, I, Hempel, E. E, & Hjelseth, E. (2022). Realising the potentials of virtual reality and building information models? Civil engineering students' utilisation of technology in a group project. In E. Bohemia, L. Buck, H. Grierson. (Ed.). DS 117: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education (E&PDE 2022), London South Bank University in London, UK. 8–9 September 2022. The Design Society. https://doi.org/10.35199/EPDE.2022.41.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sutton, K, Heathcote, A, & Bore, M. (2005). Implementing a web-based measurement of 3D understanding. In A. Donaldson (Ed.). Proceedings of the 17th Australia conference on Computer-Human Interaction: Citizens Online: Considerations for Today and the Future. Canberra, Australia. 21–25 November 2005. https://doi.org/10.5555/1108368.1108438.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Utdanningsdirektoratet [Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training]. (2006). Læreplan i Kunst og håndverk (KHV1–01) [Curriculum in Art and crafts]. https://<ulink href="http://www.udir.no/kl06/KHV1-01/Hele/Hovedomraader">www.udir.no/kl06/KHV1-01/Hele/Hovedomraader</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Uttal DH, Meadow NG, Tipton E, Hand LL, Alden AR, Warren C, Newcombe NS. The malleability of spatial skills: A meta-analysis of training studies. Psychological Bulletin. 2013; 139; 2: 352-402. 10.1037/a0028446</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wingler D, Joseph A, Bayramzadeh S, Robb A. Using virtual reality to compare design alternatives using subjective and objective evaluation methods. Health Environments Research & Design Journal. 2020; 13; 1: 129-144. 10.1177/1937586719851266</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wu J. A space design teaching model using virtual simulation technology. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning. 2018; 13; 6: 163-175. 10.3991/ijet.v13i06.8585</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zhang C, Chen B. Enhancing learning and teaching for architectural engineering students using virtual building design and construction. Higher Education Studies. 2019; 9; 2: 45-56. 10.5539/hes.v9n2p45</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0187094068-30"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibtext> Additional consent was obtained from the parents or caretakers of pupils under the age of 16.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Ingri Strand and Liv Merete Nielsen</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref62"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref63"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref64"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref73"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref80"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref83"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref91"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref95"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1485568
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Architecture in School Practice: Possible Tools for Supporting Spatial Literacy
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ingri+Strand%22">Ingri Strand</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0009-0009-1820-8145">0009-0009-1820-8145</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Liv+Merete+Nielsen%22">Liv Merete Nielsen</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22International+Journal+of+Technology+and+Design+Education%22"><i>International Journal of Technology and Design Education</i></searchLink>. 2025 35(4):1597-1618.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 22
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Secondary+Education%22">Secondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Artificial+Intelligence%22">Artificial Intelligence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Physical+Environment%22">Physical Environment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Spatial+Ability%22">Spatial Ability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Secondary+School+Students%22">Secondary School Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Building+Design%22">Building Design</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Computer+Assisted+Design%22">Computer Assisted Design</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Architectural+Education%22">Architectural Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Assignments%22">Assignments</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Visualization%22">Visualization</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Norway%22">Norway</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1007/s10798-024-09951-0
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0957-7572<br />1573-1804
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Laypeople's participation in the planning of built environments is dependent on their spatial literacy, and it is therefore important to develop this through general education. In Norway, architectural assignments in the subject of Art and crafts are aimed at enhancing spatial literacy, but not all activities are equally educative. The use of Virtual Reality (VR) can contribute to students' understanding of and engagement with spatial properties, but few studies have been conducted at the lower secondary school level. Therefore, this study was conducted to explore how pupils in a Norwegian lower secondary school reflect upon and use floor plan drawings, digital 3D models, and VR in architectural assignments aiming to support their spatial literacy. Although VR has the potential to facilitate activities that support the pupils' spatial literacy, the pupils in this study tended to use VR to a lesser extent, mostly towards the end of their projects. We suggest that the finished look of the VR visualisations, conceptualised herein as 'perceived finishedness', may have contributed to this. This highlights the use of VR as a visualisation tool rather than a design process tool.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1485568
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1485568
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1007/s10798-024-09951-0
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 22
        StartPage: 1597
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Artificial Intelligence
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Physical Environment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Spatial Ability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Secondary School Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Building Design
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Computer Assisted Design
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Architectural Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Assignments
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Visualization
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Norway
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Architecture in School Practice: Possible Tools for Supporting Spatial Literacy
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Ingri Strand
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Liv Merete Nielsen
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 09
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0957-7572
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1573-1804
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 35
            – Type: issue
              Value: 4
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: International Journal of Technology and Design Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1