Using virtual reality and 360-degree video in the religious studies classroom: An experiment

1 PEDAGOGICAL POSSIBILITIES OF “VIRTUAL RELIGION”

One of the key principles of a well-rounded pedagogy is that, to effectively teach the study of religions in a holistic way, educators should facilitate student encounters with religious persons, places, events, and objects, rather than simply ideas and texts. 1 This helps students see religions as living communities with diverse forms of expression and gives them a chance to apply course material to their own experiences of various traditions, bringing the material to life in a way that lectures, textbooks, images, and videos cannot. Many instructors address this using course field trips or independent student visits to religious sites as a basis for further analysis. While face-to-face immersion is, in many ways, the ideal way of pursuing this pedagogical goal, students can also be prevented from successfully achieving this engagement by geography, finance, safety, health, and other factors (Greenwald et al., 2017, 719; Freina & Ott, 2015, 5–7). 2 Virtual reality (VR) and 360-degree video is, in many respects, a helpful substitute for face-to-face immersion and brings several unique pedagogical benefits that are discussed below. This article is a demonstration of my experimentation using these tools in my own classes based on a description of a trial, an analysis of student surveys, and instructor's reflection, but is also a call for wider study and discussion on how these technologies can be productively used in the religious studies classroom.

The advent of relatively inexpensive 360-degree cameras and virtual reality headsets brings new possibilities to the study of religion by allowing students to become virtually immersed in religious experiences anywhere in the world at very little cost. One no longer needs to travel abroad to get a taste of what it is like at the Kumbh Mela or to chant with Tibetan monks in the Himalayas. VR users report “the feeling of being somewhere real when [they] are in VR. . . referred to as ‘presence’” (Freina & Ott, 2015, 6). These tools can bring these experiences to the classroom and enliven the material for students in a way that is completely unprecedented. VR originated as an educational tool to simulate dangerous situations like piloting a jet or handling toxic chemicals but quickly became associated with entertainment. It is being reconsidered as an educational device that provides technical training but can also foster intercultural knowledge and other goals in the humanities (Greenwald et al., 2017, 720–1). While there are many studies on VR in the classroom and a handful of books on religion and VR, no existing publications focus on VR as a pedagogical tool for the study of religion. 3 Likewise, there are not many projects that have used VR to explore religion. 4 These technologies are not just novelties; they serve as the basis for assignments that help students engage and meet core learning outcomes in the study of religion, such as empathetic understanding and ethnographic analysis of religious place, ritual, and behavior in light of theories of religion. 5 In fact, VR has been called “the empathy machine” because it allows students to literally stand in the shoes of others and experience realities that would normally be inaccessible in a way that is immediate and relatable (Korbey, 2017). 6 For example, an assignment could ask students to watch a 360-VR video of worshipers in a Hindu temple and to describe the roles and levels of engagement of various practitioners; the featured god or gods and how believers interact with them; the styles of art, music, ritual, and architecture employed; the student's reactions and feelings about being immersed as a virtual participant in an unfamiliar setting; and the applicability of various theories of the religion and other course material. 7

The religious studies classroom benefits greatly from VR technology, which places students in the midst of religious places and events that may be distant, expensive, restricted, foreign, or even dangerous. 8 While this technology is not fully immersive in the way that a physical visit is (though the Oculus Rift comes close, adding the sensation of touch), it is the closest thing to immersion available and offers some benefits that face-to-face immersion and conventional video do not. 9 Students can watch and re-watch religious events from various angles to notice intricacies that go unnoticed when seen only once in person, and can do so anywhere in the world. Assignments that incorporate these tools also allow students a new perspective on more familiar religious realities that are physically closer to home by giving them a critical distance to safely observe and study without anxieties, protocols, and lack of accessibility that can come with physical field work. This is especially helpful for students in online programs and for students who have difficulty traveling. In fact, one of the most promising applications of this technology is to allow students with disabilities that prevent them from physically visiting locations to feel virtually immersed in these settings (the technology does have limitations that can adversely affect some students, such as not being able to see the entirety of 360-degree videos easily without standing up and turning around). The VR experience gives students more agency than conventional video by allowing them to look in any direction, rather than only where the filmmaker's camera is pointing. These technologies also allow for a much more personal and immersive experience than conventional video by decreasing the sense of distance between the viewer and other participants (Ahn, Le, & Bailenson, 2013).

Virtual reality and 360-degree video are rapidly growing technologies already used by many students and educators and religion instructors should be early adopters in the classroom in order not to miss the tide. 10 There are many novel and effective applications of these tools and it would be beneficial to create a community of scholars to share their experiments with these new forms of learning, as well as their limitations and failures. 11 While some may be intimidated by or dismissive of what seems to be an esoteric or gimmicky new technology, anyone who can operate a smartphone can successfully integrate these tools into their classrooms and, with the right framing, can shape the material into rewarding and effective assignments. 12 Besides technophobia, some resistance to these technologies may come from those who see the study of religion as primarily concerned with studying texts, or who believe religion is far too serious to play such “games” with. 13 Despite any resistence, these tools are fairly simple to use and are, for the most part, inexpensive, so trying them out would not be a substantial investment for most departments and would offer many pedagogical possibilities and increased student engagement. 14 A basic VR headset costs around 25 dollars while less expensive options such as Google Cardboard can be purchased for 15 dollars or less. More expensive options such as Oculus Rift that include virtual touch run into the hundreds of dollars. You can create 360-degree photos with smartphone applications such as Bubbli, but at the moment, 360-degree video requires special video recorders, which cost 200 dollars or more. Soon quality 360-video will be a feature of many smartphones, making the technology ubiquitous. While VR headsets can give students a way to experience prerecorded videos and photos, students and teachers can also collaborate to create their own videos of religious sites and events, narrated or unnarrated. These videos could eventually be compiled to create a global database of virtual religious experience available to anyone with an internet connection. 15

2 DESCRIPTION OF TRIAL

In Fall 2017, I incorporated 360-degree videos and VR headsets into two sections of a course I have taught many times at the University of Wisconsin-Fond du Lac: REL 101, “Introduction to the Study of Religion.” 16 This popular course, which introduces students to several theories of religion and a handful of the world's religions, offers interdisciplinary studies or humanities credit and was taught through the University of Wisconsin Colleges (UWC). 17 This course and several others on the topic of religion are offered at the various campuses of the UWC by a small religious studies program run by one tenure-track faculty member (myself) and several Instructional Academic Staff members (adjunct instructors) and is housed within the philosophy department. For many UWC students, who often have families and hold multiple jobs, these classes are the only formal academic instruction they will ever receive in the study of religions. Like many institutions, the access mission at the UWC is bolstered by a strong emphasis on self-reflective teaching practices. I was first introduced to the use of 360-videos and VR in the classroom at the summer 2017 Digital Teaching and Learning Conference in Madison. Like many, I initially associated these versatile tools primarily with house tours and video games but was inspired by the conference to think more about how the tools could improve my teaching.

I began incorporating 360-videos and VR headsets into my Fall 2017 courses by carefully choosing a 360-degree video for each religion covered in class and then constructing assignments around these videos that were keyed to certain religion-specific topics covered in class. The assignments were designed to promote the course learning outcomes: (1) Demonstrate knowledge, critical reflection, and empathetic understanding of the diversity of human religious experience, belief, and practice; (2) Articulate and evaluate various approaches and theories in the study of religion; (3) Apply these approaches in understanding diverse religious traditions; and (4) Perform thoughtful analysis of the role of religions in the contemporary world. The VR assignments typically had several general goals related to these learning outcomes for students: to explore more deeply some aspect of religious practice seen in the video by bringing in knowledge about the tradition covered in class; to describe and personally reflect on details in the video to elicit self-awareness and empathy; and to apply theories of religion covered early in the course to specific religious practices (these assignments were called Putting Ideas To Work [PITWs]). For example, for the Confucianism assignment students reflected on a video of a temple in China in light of the close historical interactions of the Three Teachings of China, an idea that was discussed in class. The person who posted the video raised the question of authenticity by describing the religious “mish-mash” found in the temple as dubious, and students were to contrast this view with the complex religious reality on the ground that the temple 360-degree video reveals. The assignment on Buddhism included students deducing what form of Buddhism they were viewing from cues in the narration (based on material learned in the course [the name of Amitabha was mentioned in the video, along with other hints]), attempting a mini-meditation session, and then discussing what William James would have said about the meditation described in the video, based on his four marks of mystical experience. The video on Judaism shows how the oldest synagogue in London was only allowed to be built in a concealed location and had to blend in by looking like a church. Students reflected on a time when they felt stigmatized or out of place because of who they are, and if they would assimilate or separate in this situation, considering the psychological and social effect of diaspora.

As these examples show, students were asked to take on or consider the perspectives of the groups they were studying and the assignments included a mix of theoretical analysis, empathetic understanding, and self-reflection. Each assignment also encouraged active learning by asking students to describe the details they noticed in the video and relate them to the course (for example, by pointing out how the details of an Orthodox Divine Liturgy fit into Ninian Smart's seven dimensions of religion). This descriptive strategy had the additional benefit of making students actually watch the videos, since by doing this, they effectively proved they watched it. I provided a transcript for each video to ensure students could understand what was being said, could “prepare” for the video by reading the text first, and could focus more on the visual details while actually watching the video. Students were encouraged to view the videos multiple times, which was reasonable given their short length and their rich visual content that is difficult to fully register on first viewing.

The process I used to select videos was to search YouTube for keywords related to each religious tradition, filter search results by the 360-degree feature and duration, (typically under five minutes), and then find the right video that met the criteria mentioned above. Some videos were tours of religious sites, such as guided tours of al-Asqa mosque, while others were more ethnographic or documentary in nature, such as an unnarrated clip of an Antiochian Orthodox Liturgy in Bloomington, Indiana, or a narrated account of the Hungry Ghost Festival in Malaysia. The videos were intended to be viewed by students on VR headsets that they checked out from the library. These seven assignments were worth a total of 20% of the student's grade, which also relied on quizzes (20%), tests (40%), and a group-constructed wiki page (20%). The assignments were completed during the last two months of the course after various theories of religion had been covered. One assignment was typically completed and due at the end of each week.

After selecting the videos, I created an unlisted (more private) “Virtual Religion” playlist on YouTube and made that link available to students in instructions for each assignment. 18 I considered having students assemble inexpensive cardboard VR headsets in class, but decided this would be too time consuming and assembled them myself for students to try out with their smartphones. Assignment instructions were emailed to students each week. I also posted a drop box item created for each assignment on the course's D2L/Brightspace page, where students uploaded their completed submissions. In addition to an initial VR trial in class to familiarize students with the technology, the assignment instructions always included “Viewer Instructions” to remind students of how to operate the VR viewers, access the playlist, navigate to the Cardboard View on the YouTube app, and so forth (see Appendix A). These were followed by the instructions and questions specific to each assignment and religion, which are compiled in Appendix B and correspond to the respective videos on the YouTube playlist.

3 STUDENT SURVEYS

At the end of the course, I handed out a survey that asked students to evaluate and reflect on their use of VR in the course and the effectiveness of the VR assignments from their perspective (see Appendix C). 19 There were a total of fifty-three students in the two sections, thirty-one in one section and twenty-two in the other. Thirty-eight of these students agreed to let me use their assignments and surveys as part of this research, while the remaining students were either not in class or chose not to have their work used in the project. 20 Overall, students were very positive about their experiences with the 360-degree VR assignments. Most of the survey questions dealt with how they felt about their experience with the technology and the assignments that used it, and involved an option of selecting “yes” or “no,” and a space to elaborate on their answers. (See Appendix D for a breakdown of how many students responded affirmatively to the yes or no questions.)

There were several other questions asking for suggestions for improvement and comments on the most and least successful aspects of the assignments, which did not include a yes or no option. The last question asked students to rate the 360-degree VR aspect of the course on a scale from one to ten: the average rating on this was 7.9, with most of the responses clustered around 8 or 9. 21 The survey shows that these “enhanced” assignments were seen as quite valuable to the course from a student perspective. Based on student survey comments seen below, their responses were closely aligned with the course learning outcomes mentioned above.

Several prominent themes emerged from written elaboration on student answers. A large number of students used experiential language to describe the assignments, such as: “immersive,” “helped experience it firsthand,” “felt like I was actually there,” “like a front-row bystander,” a sense of “being there” and feeling “present” while “exploring” a new place and being “surrounded” by a new environment. One student said, “It was interesting to be in the middle of everything. It is the closest a lot of us will be to a religion so it was very informative in a way that wouldn't normally be possible.” Two others felt that the assignments made them “more engaged with the religion on a personal level.” While one or two disagreed, this majority opinion suggests that the assignments did, in fact, give the student a strong sense of virtual presence at various religious locales. Many students also reflected on the empathy and participatory feeling that the videos elicited, using phrases like: “an inside taste of other religions,” “get into their mindset,” “I felt like I was a part of it, that I was participating,” “you were actually there in their sacred place with them,” and “allowed to step into their world.” One student pointed out feeling empathy with how persecuted groups are treated, specifically referencing the assignment on Judaism. Another said, “When reading, I am easily distracted but this allowed me to learn and experience it in a way that was hard to distract me so since all my attention was focused I could ‘stand in their shoes’ more.” Two comments also expressed that the videos helped them see things, not only intersubjectively, but with a more “objective view” that “let you view from all angles,” likely meaning that that one can look anywhere in the video, unlike in traditional videos, and that, despite the virtual immersion, the viewer still recognizes they are at a safe distance from the material – a distance from which they can analyze the material with less pressure.

Some students valued the questions that had more of a self-reflective or experiential component and commented positively on the assignments on Judaism and Buddhism. A few students thought the assignment questions were too complex or abstract but one of those students wrote that the questions in later assignments became easier. One student did not see a clear connection between the videos and the questions and another thought the questions should be more specific to videos because it was possible to answer some without watching the videos. Another student thought the assignments were helpful but “didn't involve overall knowledge of a religion.” Still, most students “could relate to material from book” and felt assignments “directly related to content” and “helped connect theories to religions and made content easier.” One student thought that it was not the videos themselves that put the course knowledge into action but the assignment questions. Two students thought it would have been better to discuss the assignments more in class rather than doing them as homework. One student thought longer, unedited videos that were more ethnographic, like the one on Christianity, were most effective in making one “feel part of an experience” and develop a sense of empathy, while another felt the edited “guided tour” videos were more interesting. Two students wished there had been more videos in the YouTube playlist, though they did not specify wanting more corresponding assignments.

In terms of technical issues, six students experienced dizziness, double-vision, or could not see so close to their face; four students had trouble fitting their phone into the viewer; one student found that working and living outside of Fond du Lac made checking out and using the viewers inconvenient; another student thought that the prerequisite of having a smartphone and data plan could be a barrier to some students. A few students complained that the technology seemed to work better with Apple products than Android devices, that the quality of some of the videos was poor, or that the quality of the VR viewers needed to be improved to get the full experience. One student thought it was difficult to concentrate on the video and learned more from the audio, while others felt it was a considerable improvement on traditional video. Another student's phone broke during the semester, which made it difficult to complete the assignments. To work around these issues, some students simply watched the videos on non-VR devices such as their phones, computers, or tablets while others borrowed roommates' phones that better fit the viewers, used their own more expensive VR viewers, or that of a friend. Overall, students did not have significant technical issues and most described the process as “easy to use” and “fun, interesting, easy,” with several students commenting that these assignments were a “great use of tech” and should be continued in future semesters.

Many students thought that purchasing their own VR viewer as part of the required course materials would help them avoid having to go to the library each time they wanted to use one and allow them to do assignments on their own time. Others already had their own viewers or thought the option of checking one out without having to pay for it was helpful and should be continued. Several students admitted not using the viewers because of the extra work it required and said having their own would make it much more likely that they would use one. One student said that having a personal VR headset would allow them to watch videos several times and share and discuss with family and friends, which would help the learning process.

4 INSTRUCTOR REFLECTION

While the information gleaned from the surveys is not definitive, it does show that most students perceived the assignments as adding to their knowledge of religions and as a positive experience in the course. From an instructor's perspective, the student survey comments and the assignment submissions themselves reveal that 360-video and VR can be helpful in meeting the learning outcomes when framed by appropriate assignments and questions. While ethnographic films and documentaries can serve some of the same functions as VR, such as linking student experience with course material and the application of theories to specific situations, the unique characteristics of VR described in previously mentioned studies seem to hold true here as well: it can foster increased empathy, a sense of virtual presence, personal engagement and participation with the material, and a perceived decrease in distance between viewer and the virtual world and its inhabitants (Ahn et al., 2013; Cassard & Sloboda, 2016; Freina & Ott, 2015; Greenwald et al., 2017; Korbey, 2017; Merchant, Goetz, Cifuentes, Keeney-Kennicutt, & Davis, 2014). Another difference is that the VR experience can be more personal and subjective than watching a video with a class full of people, though both situations have their own pedagogical merits. 22 For example, it would be easier to discuss a traditional video as a class immediately after watching it, but students would not feel as immersed or present in the setting. It is harder to watch a VR video as a class in a coordinated way and this is why I have mostly used it for take-home assignments so far. While it is possible to show 360-videos on a projector screen to a class, there needs to be a “director” who moves the mouse around on the video to change the camera angle for the class. Still, I found incorporating the videos rather easy and, other than some additional technical instruction and equipment, VR and 360-degree videos are not significantly different to administer than other media, though students are likely to be less familiar with these and need to be reminded that they need to stand up and look around to get the full effect of the technology.

To further assess the strength of these technologies in religious studies, one would need to compare students who complete these assignments to students in a control group who complete different assignments, which I have not yet attempted. Yet the trial and survey made clear that there is value in continuing to experiment with these technologies on assignments in future courses and helped me determine several changes I would like to make going forward. Student comments made it clear that some assignments were more successful in helping students to see that they were connecting ideas from class to the video; creating better questions is certainly an area that can always be improved upon. I plan to make assignments even more participatory and self-reflective, since they seemed to be popular qualities with students, while still including the application of theories. The student who wrote that the questions rather than the videos put their knowledge into action was entirely correct: success in implementing this technology depends completely on how videos are framed in light of course goals. I will try to ensure that questions are specific enough to require students to watch them, discuss the assignments more as a class, and be clear that students who experience dizziness or headaches have the option to view without VR on their phones or computers and that those without these devices can still view the videos in campus computer labs.

The number of 360 VR videos available on YouTube can be a limitation in creating assignments but the collection is growing quickly as the technology becomes cheaper and more familiar; there were many videos to choose from in each tradition. As the number of videos online increases and the technology develops, the available videos will hopefully also improve in quality. Ideally, an instructor or class could create their own videos, which can be structured based on the needs of the course. I have already recorded a number of 360-degree videos of religious events on my own and plan to record more so I don't have to rely on the quality and selection of existing videos on YouTube. This will allow me to tailor videos and assignments even more closely to class materials and learning outcomes. This approach, however, requires more time, travel, and technical proficiency from instructors (and students, if they also record video), so I will likely continue to rely on existing online VR resources to some degree for the sake of expediency. Privacy is another issue: some may express concerns about having videos of themselves online due to recent shootings in churches and the presence of minors at the services, even if the videos are on an unlisted playlist not available without knowing the playlist's URL. I have been denied permission to record video at a church in the US for these reasons and once even had my camera temporarily confiscated at a church in China due to political sensitivities. This concern for security in light of recent events and political realities could increasingly be an issue in creating videos and instructors and students should be aware not only of technical considerations but of the ethical, political, and legal issues involved in recording religious services. However, 360-degree cameras will also probably become less conspicuous and more widely acceptable to use in public situations, much like smartphone cameras have.

In Spring 2018, I experimented with having students of an Introduction to Christianity class create their own 360-degree videos of church services which provided an even more hands-on, immersive, and student-directed experience. Due to the subject of the class, there were local options for recording videos, which students incorporated into a field report/research paper and class presentation in which they showed and explained their videos in historical and theological context. Students completed a training session in class to go over the technical and social protocols involved (getting permission, explaining to community, placement of camera, how to record, and so forth). As a result of an earlier student survey, I had students buy an inexpensive cardboard VR headset from the campus bookstore for this class. The effort had mixed results, with some students successfully recording clips and others having several technical issues (such as needing a replacement SD card), though most of these issues were easy to remedy and are not likely to be repeated. The students who had issues were allowed to record with their own phones, but it was not ideal to have to ask my busy students to attend a second service despite the fact that, in some cases, students were going to attend the service anyway. I encouraged students to choose a form of Christianity that was unfamiliar to them but many opted for more familiar varieties. It was also difficult to schedule when students could check out the cameras from me since there were only two cameras for a class of eight students. Despite the obstacles, I consider the experiment a success since it ultimately accomplished what I hoped it would, though I am unsure if I will repeat it in the future. These are just a few details to show another way to incorporate VR in a more student-directed way, but an analysis of the course could fill a separate article.

In summary, this trial has tentatively confirmed my initial hypothesis that VR and 360-degree video can be used for innovative and engaging assignments that further learning outcomes and have significant pedagogical potential in the study and teaching of religions. As evidenced by student surveys and comments, VR assignments help to meet learning outcomes such as empathetic understanding, application of theories of religion, and analysis of contemporary religious practice based on knowledge gained in the course. This coincides with my own reflections as an instructor based on assessment of assignments and comments. The technical difficulties were minimal (they can be numerous during a trial), suggesting that similar experiments would not be overly challenging for others. The trial and student survey have given me constructive feedback and a degree of proficiency as I attempt to integrate this technology in future courses by revealing details that need to be rethought or adjusted. It is my hope that other instructors will discover new ways to employ these tools in their teaching and that those who do will have found some usefulness in reading about the successes and limitations in my experience.