This study adopted a comparative experimental design to investigate the effects of collaborative generative learning (CGL) in an AI-enabled immersive virtual environment (AI-IVE) on learners with different motivation levels. Learners with high motivation levels (HML) showed strong interest in both the AI-IVE and the subject content, whereas learners with low motivation levels (LML) lacked interest in one or both aspects. A total of 67 ninth-grade students from two intact classes participated in the study. The classes were randomly assigned to either the experimental group or the control group. In the experimental group, students engaged collaboratively in generative learning activities using a structured CGL strategy with clearly defined roles, while in the control group, students completed the same activities individually using an individual generative learning (IGL) strategy. The results indicated that the CGL strategy enhanced both human-computer and learner-learner interactions, leading to improved learning outcomes in the AI-IVE. These effects were particularly evident in three aspects: (1) improved academic performance, knowledge retention, and transfer among LML learners; (2) increased situational interest, engagement, and self-efficacy; and (3) reduced cognitive load. These findings provide meaningful insights for the design and implementation of generative learning in AI-IVEs.
Alario-HoyosC.Estévez-AyresI.Pérez-SanagustínM.Delgado KloosC.Fernández-PanaderoC. (2017). Understanding learners’ motivation and learning strategies in MOOCs. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(3), 119–137. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i3.2996
2.
BaceviciuteS.TerkildsenT.MakranskyG. (2021). Remediating learning from non-immersive to immersive media: Using EEG to investigate the effects of environmental embeddedness on reading in virtual reality. Computers & Education, 164(4), Article 104122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104122
3.
BaxterG.HaineyT. (2024). Using immersive technologies to enhance the student learning experience. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 21(3), 403–425. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-05-2023-0078
4.
BeckD.MorgadoL.O’SheaP. (2023). Educational practices and strategies with immersive learning environments: Mapping of reviews for using the metaverse. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 17, 319–341. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2023.3243946
5.
BekteshiL. (2025). Education in the era of AI and immersive technologies: A systematic review. Journal of Research in Engineering and Computer Sciences, 3(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.63002/jrecs.31.779
6.
BergerF.SchreinerC.HagleitnerW.Jesacher-RößlerL.RoßnaglS.KralerC. (2021). Predicting coping with self-regulated distance learning in times of COVID-19: Evidence from a longitudinal study. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 701255. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.701255
ÇebiA.GüyerT. (2020). Students’ interaction patterns in different online learning activities and their relationship with motivation, self-regulated learning strategy and learning performance. Education and Information Technologies, 25(5), 3975–3993. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10151-1
10.
CesareniD.CacciamaniS.FujitaN. (2016). Role taking and knowledge building in a blended university course. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(1), 9–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-015-9224-0
11.
ChenO.PaasF.SwellerJ. (2023). A cognitive load theory approach to defining and measuring task complexity through element interactivity. Educational Psychology Review, 35(2), 63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09782-w
12.
ClarkR. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299088
13.
ConradM.KablitzD.SchumannS. (2024). Learning effectiveness of immersive virtual reality in education and training: A systematic review of findings. Computers & Education: X Reality, 4(1), Article 100053. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cexr.2024.100053
14.
CookD. A.ArtinoA. R.Jr. (2016). Motivation to learn: An overview of contemporary theories. Medical education, 50(10), 997–1014. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13074
DingL.ZouD. (2024). Automated writing evaluation systems: A systematic review of Grammarly, Pigai, and Criterion with a perspective on future directions in the age of generative artificial intelligence. Education and Information Technologies, 29(11), 14151–14203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12402-3
19.
El-SeoudS. A.El-KhoulyM. M.Taj-EddinI. A. T. F. (2016). Motivation in e-learning: How do we keep learners motivated in an e-learning environment. International Journal of Learning and Teaching, 2(1), 63–66. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijlt.2.1.63-66
GagnéM.ForestJ.VansteenkisteM.Crevier-BraudL.Van den BroeckA.AspeliA. K.WestbyeC. (2015). The multidimensional work motivation scale: Validation evidence in seven languages and nine countries. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, 24(2), 178–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2013.877892
22.
HewT. S.KadirS. L. S. A. (2016). Predicting the acceptance of cloud-based virtual learning environment: The roles of self determination and channel expansion theory. Telematics and Informatics, 33(4), 990–1013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2016.01.004
23.
HuL.ChenG.LiP.HuangJ. (2021). Multimedia effect in problem solving: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 33(4), 1717–1747. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09610-z
24.
HuangA. Y.LuO. H.YangS. J. (2023). Effects of artificial intelligence–enabled personalized recommendations on learners’ learning engagement, motivation, and outcomes in a flipped classroom. Computers & Education, 194, Article 104684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104684
25.
HwangG. J.TuY. F.ChuH. C. (2023). Conceptions of the metaverse in higher education: A draw-a-picture analysis and surveys to investigate the perceptions of students with different motivation levels. Computers & Education, 203(3), Article 104868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104868
26.
HwangG. J.YangL. H.WangS. Y. (2013). A concept map-embedded educational computer game for improving students’ learning performance in natural science courses. Computers & Education, 69(1), 121–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.008
27.
JärveläS.CowleyB.SalminenM.JacucciG.HamariJ.RavajaN. (2021). Augmented virtual reality meditation: Shared dyadic biofeedback increases social presence via respiratory synchrony. ACM Transactions on Social Computing, 4(2), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1145/3449358
28.
JinS.ZhongZ.LiK.KangC. (2024). Investigating the effect of guided inquiry on learners with different prior knowledge in immersive virtual environments. Education and Information Technologies, 29(17), 22447–22473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12719-7
29.
JongbloedJ.ChakerR.LavouéE. (2024). Immersive procedural training in virtual reality: A systematic literature review. Computers & Education, 221(3), Article 105124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105124
30.
KlingenbergS.JørgensenM. L. M.DandanellG.SkriverK.MottelsonA.MakranskyG. (2020). Investigating the effect of teaching as a generative learning strategy when learning through desktop and immersive VR: A media and methods experiment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(6), 2115–2138. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13029
31.
KovanovićV.JoksimovićS.PoquetO.HennisT.de VriesP.HatalaM.DawsonS.SiemensG.GaševićD. (2019). Examining communities of inquiry in massive open online courses: The role of study strategies. The Internet and Higher Education, 40, 20–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.09.001
32.
KuhailM. A.AlturkiN.AlramlawiS.AlhejoriK. (2023). Interacting with educational chatbots: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies, 28(1), 973–1018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11177-3
33.
LeeS. M.YangZ.WuJ. G. (2024). Live, play, and learn: Language learner engagement in the immersive VR environment. Education and Information Technologies, 29(9), 10529–10550. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12215-4
34.
LehikkoA.NykänenM.LukanderK.UusitaloJ.RuokamoH. (2024). Exploring interactivity effects on learners’ sense of agency, cognitive load, and learning outcomes in immersive virtual reality: A mixed methods study. Computers & Education: X Reality, 4(4), Article 100066. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cexr.2024.100066
35.
LinJ. W.HuangH. H.ChuangY. S. (2015). The impacts of network centrality and self‐regulation on an e-learning environment with the support of social network awareness. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(1), 32–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12120
36.
LiuR.WangL.LeiJ.WangQ.RenY. (2020). Effects of an immersive virtual reality‐based classroom on students’ learning performance in science lessons. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(6), 2034–2049. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13028
37.
LuoL.HuJ.ZhengY.LiC. (2025). Human vs. AI: Does AI learning assistant enhance students’ innovation behavior?Education and Information Technologies, 30(12), 17483–17530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13474-z
38.
MakranskyG.LilleholtL. (2018). A structural equation modeling investigation of the emotional value of immersive virtual reality in education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(5), 1141–1164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9581-2
39.
MakranskyG.PetersenG. B. (2021). The cognitive affective model of immersive learning (CAMIL): A theoretical research-based model of learning in immersive virtual reality. Educational Psychology Review, 33(3), 937–958. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09586-2
40.
MayerR. E. (2014). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In MayerR. E. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 43–71). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139547369
41.
MayerR. E. (2017). Using multimedia for e-learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(5), 403–423. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12197
MoserS.LewalterD. (2024). The impact of instructional support via generative learning strategies on the perception of visual authenticity, learning outcomes, and satisfaction in AR-based learning. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 39(4), 3437–3462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-024-00813-w
44.
PahiK.HawladerS.HicksE.ZamanA.PhanV. (2024). Enhancing active learning through collaboration between human teachers and generative AI. Computers and Education Open, 6(3), Article 100183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100183
45.
PapanastasiouG.DrigasA.SkianisC.LytrasM.PapanastasiouE. (2019). Virtual and augmented reality effects on K-12, higher and tertiary education students’ twenty-first century skills. Virtual Reality, 23(4), 425–436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-018-0363-2
46.
PengX.ShiZ.JinP.ZhangX.YangZ.FengX. (2024). A blind source separation method: Nonlinear chirp component analysis. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 216(7), Article 111491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2024.111491
PetersenG. B.PetkakisG.MakranskyG. (2022). A study of how immersion and interactivity drive VR learning. Computers & Education, 179, Article 104429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104429
PöhlmannK. M. T.FöckerJ.DickinsonP.ParkeA.O’HareL. (2021). The effect of motion direction and eccentricity on vection, VR sickness and head movements in virtual reality. Multisensory Research, 34(6), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1163/22134808-bja10049
51.
PoupardM.LarrueF.SauzéonH.TricotA. (2025). A systematic review of immersive technologies for education: Learning performance, cognitive load and intrinsic motivation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 56(1), 5–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13503
52.
PratamaM. P.SampeloloR.LuraH. (2023). Revolutionizing education: Harnessing the power of artificial intelligence for personalized learning. Klasikal: Journal of education, language teaching and science, 5(2), 350–357. https://doi.org/10.52208/klasikal.v5i2.877
53.
QiS.DerakhshanA. (2024). Technology-based collaborative learning: EFL learners’ social regulation and modifications in their academic emotions and academic performance. Education and Information Technologies, 30(7), 8611–8636. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13167-z
54.
QuinlanK. M. (2019). What triggers students’ interest during higher education lectures? Personal and situational variables associated with situational interest. Studies in Higher Education, 44(10), 1781–1792. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1665325
55.
RahayuR.MasrukhanM.SugiantoS. (2019). Mathematics teaching using generative learning model with character building content aided by interactive learning media. Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education Research, 8(1), 35–48. https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/ujmer/article/view/26674
56.
RahimiM.RiaziA.SaifS. (2008). An investigation into the factors affecting the use of language learning strategies by Persian EFL learners. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 31–60. https://journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php/CJAL/article/view/19915
57.
ReeveJ.TsengC. M. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 257–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.05.002
58.
SajjaR.SermetY.CikmazM.CwiertnyD.DemirI. (2024). Artificial intelligence-enabled intelligent assistant for personalized and adaptive learning in higher education. Information, 15(10), 596. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15100596
59.
SangerC. S. (2020). Inclusive pedagogy and universal design approaches for diverse learning environments. In Diversity and inclusion in global higher education: Lessons from across Asia (pp. 31–71). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1628-3
60.
SanzanaM. R.AbdulrazicM. O. M.WongJ. Y.KarunagharanJ. K.ChiaJ. (2024). Gamified virtual labs: Shifting from physical environments for low-risk interactive learning. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 16(1), 208–221. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-09-2022-0281
ShahrezaeiA.SohaniM.TaherkhaniS.ZarghamiS. Y. (2024). The impact of surgical simulation and training technologies on general surgery education. BMC Medical Education, 24(1), 1297. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-06299-w
63.
ShresthaN. (2021). Factor analysis as a tool for survey analysis. American Journal of Applied Mathematics and Statistics, 9(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.12691/ajams-9-1-2
64.
SkulmowskiA.XuK. M. (2022). Understanding cognitive load in digital and online learning: A new perspective on extraneous cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 34(1), 171–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09624-7
65.
SmithR.SnowP.SerryT.HammondL. (2021). The role of background knowledge in reading comprehension: A critical review. Reading Psychology, 42(3), 214–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2021.1888348
66.
SplichalJ. M.OshimaJ.OshimaR. (2018). Regulation of collaboration in project-based learning mediated by CSCL scripting reflection. Computers & Education, 125(3), 132–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.003
TracyK.SpantidiO. (2025). Impact of GPT-driven teaching assistants in VR learning environments. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 18, 192–205. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2025.3539179
69.
UrhahneD.WijniaL. (2023). Theories of motivation in education: An integrative framework. Educational Psychology Review, 35(2), 45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09767-9
70.
WangJ.JinS.ZhongZ.FengS.DengY.LiR. (2023). Spatial cognition effects of IVE teaching resources on red-green color blindness. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 61(7), 1389–1409. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331231158759
71.
WangJ.StebbinsA.FerdigR. E. (2022). Examining the effects of students' self-efficacy and prior knowledge on learning and visual behavior in a physics game. Computers & Education, 178, Article 104405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104405
72.
WeiX.SaabN.AdmiraalW. (2023). Do learners share the same perceived learning outcomes in MOOCs? Identifying the role of motivation, perceived learning support, learning engagement, and self-regulated learning strategies. The Internet and Higher Education, 56, Article 100880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2022.100880
73.
WetherbyJ. L. (2021). Incorporating scripts with cooperative learning to promote critical thinking skills in secondary science. (Doctoral dissertation, Liberty University). Liberty University Digital Commons. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/doctoral/2928
74.
WuD.ChenM.ChenX.LiuX. (2024). Analyzing K-12 AI education: A large language model study of classroom instruction on learning theories, pedagogy, tools, and AI literacy. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7(39), Article 100295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100295
75.
XieT.LiY.TangY. (2023). Effects of using immersive virtual reality for science education on learning outcomes: A randomized controlled pilot study. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 16(6), 1045–1056. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2023.3263587
76.
XuK. M.KoornP.De KoningB.SkuballaI. T.LinL.HenderikxM.MarshH.SwellerJ.PaasF. (2021). A growth mindset lowers perceived cognitive load and improves learning: Integrating motivation to cognitive load. Journal of Educational Psychology, 113(6), 1177-1191. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000631
77.
YuS. J.SunJ. C. Y.ChenO. T. C. (2019). Effect of AR-based online wearable guides on university students’ situational interest and learning performance. Universal Access in the Information Society, 18(2), 287–299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-017-0591-3
78.
ZhangP.GrahamS. (2020). Vocabulary learning through listening: Comparing L2 explanations, teacher codeswitching, contrastive focus-on-form and incidental learning. Language Teaching Research, 24(6), 765–784. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12411
79.
ZhengL.ZhongL.NiuJ.LongM.ZhaoJ. (2021). Effects of personalized intervention on collaborative knowledge building, group performance, socially shared metacognitive regulation, and cognitive load in computer-supported collaborative learning. Educational Technology & Society, 24(3), 174–193. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27032864
80.
ZhongZ.WangJ.DengY.JinS.FengS.LiR. (2023). Effects of external scripts incorporating capabilities, roles and tasks on IVE’s collaborative learning. Education and Information Technologies, 28(9), 11495–11516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11640-9
81.
ZhongZ.ZhangG.JinS.WangJ.MaN.FengS. (2022). Investigating the effect of peer instruction on learners with different cognitive styles in VR-based learning environment. Education and Information Technologies, 27(8), 11875–11899. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11115-3
82.
ZhongZ.ZouX.JinS.LiK.HuangJ. (2025). The impact of virtual teachers on learners in collaborative inquiry activities: An experimental study. Education and Information Technologies, 30(14), 19591–19626. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13540-6
