
which three planes intersect at a single point, which
is the solution to the system.
51% of students indicated a line as a possible so-
lution. This suggests that students have a good under-
standing that three planes can intersect along a line,
which corresponds to an infinite number of solutions
to a system of equations.
As many as 68% of students identified a plane as
a possible solution. This suggests that students may
understand situation with plane as a solution, which
has infinite number of solutions.
These results suggest that students have difficulty
understanding the geometric interpretation of systems
of linear equations in three unknowns. They are good
at understanding the concept of no solutions and have
a reasonable understanding that a solution can be a
line. However, they have considerable difficulty vi-
sualizing a point as a solution and distinguishing be-
tween a plane as a member of the system and a plane
as a solution.
Thus, developing and utilizing a VR applica-
tion for solving systems of linear equations in three-
dimensional space is a logical and effective approach.
6 CONCLUSIONS
This study highlights the potential of VR applications
in enhancing the understanding of systems of linear
equations, particularly in three-dimensional space.
Our findings suggest that while students can grasp
certain geometric interpretations, such as the absence
of solutions or solutions as plane, they struggle with
visualizing points and lines as solutions.
The VR application proved effective in addressing
these challenges, allowing students to interact with
linear systems dynamically and gain a deeper concep-
tual understanding. By engaging with geometric rep-
resentations in an immersive environment, students
were able to correctly identify all possible solutions
after using the application.
These results suggest that VR can be a valuable
tool for algebra education, particularly in topics re-
quiring spatial reasoning. Future research should ex-
plore its effectiveness across different student popu-
lations and mathematical concepts, as well as inves-
tigate how VR-based learning compares to traditional
instructional methods in the long term.
6.1 Limitations
While the application currently lacks multiplayer
functionality, its single-user focus aligns with the
study’s goal of individualized skill assessment. Fu-
ture iterations could incorporate collaborative fea-
tures for group problem-solving scenarios.
We recognize the limitations of our data and study
design. Firstly, the sample was limited to a single field
of study and one university. Conducting several ex-
periments at different universities and taking into ac-
count students from different majors is considered to
be done in the future. Secondly, we believe that the
participants’ motivation to fully engage in the study
was moderate.
REFERENCES
Awang, L., Yusop, F., and Danaee, M. (2016). Current prac-
tices and future direction of artificial intelligence in
mathematics education: A systematic review. Journal
of Mathematics Education, 20(2).
Bieniecki, W., Stolinski, S., and Stando, J. (2010). Au-
tomatic evaluation of examination tasks in the form
of function plot. In 2010 Proceedings of VIth Inter-
national Conference on Perspective Technologies and
Methods in MEMS Design, pages 140–143.
Dalgarno, B. and Lee, M. J. W. (2010). What are the learn-
ing affordances of 3-d virtual environments? British
Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1):10–32.
Du, X. and Li, Z. (2022). A review of the application of
virtual reality technology in higher education based on
web of science literature data as an example. Frontiers
in Education, 7.
Ertmer, P. and Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2010). Teacher
technology change: How knowledge, beliefs, and cul-
ture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in
Education, 42:255–284.
Johnson-Glenberg, M. (2017). Embodied Education in
Mixed and Mediated Realties, pages 193–217.
Li, X. (2024). Extended reality (xr) in mathematics assess-
ment: A pedagogical vision. Research Matters: A
Cambridge University Press & Assessment publica-
tion, 37:6–23.
L
´
opez, J. and Garcia, M. (2023). Assessing the impact of
virtual reality on mathematics teaching in rural sec-
ondary schools. Journal of Educational Technology,
15(2):123–135.
Makransky, G. and Petersen, G. B. (2021). The cognitive
affective model of immersive learning (camil): A the-
oretical research-based model of learning in immer-
sive virtual reality. Educational Psychology Review,
33(3):937–958.
Nicholson, R., Bartindale, T., Kharrufa, A., Kirk, D.,
and Walker, C. (2022). Participatory design goes to
school: Co-teaching as a form of co-design for educa-
tional technology. pages 1–17.
Qui
˜
nones, D. I. P., Peniche, J., and Rosas, J. (2016). Impact
of virtual reality use on the teaching and learning of
vectors. Frontiers in Education, 7.
ERSeGEL 2025 - Workshop on Extended Reality and Serious Games for Education and Learning
880