Articles
DOI DOI: 10.62441/actainnovations.v63i.1139

ENHANCING ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS AMONG THAI STUDENTS THROUGH VIRTUAL REALITY: A MIXED-METHODS STUDY ON ENDANGERED SPECIES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND FOOD SYSTEMS

Dr. Alongkot Chukaew1, Yada Rujanavej 2
  1. 1 Director of Environmental and Social Foundation, Thailand.
  2. 2 Youth Project Member, Marine Endangered Species Conservation Environmental and Social Foundation, Thailand.

Abstract

This study investigates the integration of Virtual Reality (VR) as an innovative pedagogical tool for enhancing environmental awareness among Thai students at the upper primary and lower secondary levels. Employing a mixed-methods design, the research involved 12,000 students across Thailand’s four major regions and examined the cognitive, affective, and behavioral outcomes of VR-based learning modules focused on endangered species, climate change, and sustainable food systems. The findings demonstrate that VR significantly improved students' environmental knowledge, emotional engagement, and participatory behavior, particularly when combined with structured group discussions. Behavioral observations and regression analyses revealed that participation in peer discussions was a key predictor of emotional learning, underscoring the importance of collaborative learning environments. Furthermore, the study synthesized a scalable instructional model and proposed strategic recommendations for embedding VR into Thailand’s national curriculum. These include infrastructure support, teacher capacity-building, content localization, and regional adaptation strategies. The study contributes to the growing body of literature affirming VR’s potential to foster transformative learning experiences that are immersive, equitable, and pedagogically relevant in environmental education.

How to Cite

Chukaew, D. A., & Rujanavej , Y. (2026). ENHANCING ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS AMONG THAI STUDENTS THROUGH VIRTUAL REALITY: A MIXED-METHODS STUDY ON ENDANGERED SPECIES, CLIMATE CHANGE AND FOOD SYSTEMS. ACTA INNOVATIONS, 63, 727–739. https://doi.org/10.62441/actainnovations.v63i.1139
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS) BibTeX

References

  1. 1. Al Fersi, G., Mohd Yusof, A., Romli, A., Tawafak, R. M., Malik, S. I., Jabbar, J., & Rsuli, M. E. (2021). A review
  2. 2. of virtual reality applications in an educational domain. International Journal of Interactive Mobile
  3. 3. Technologies (iJIM), 15(22), 99–110. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v15i22.26091
  4. 4. Alhalabi, W. (2016). Virtual reality systems enhance students' achievements in engineering education. Behaviour & Information Technology, 35(11), 919–925. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2016.1212931
  5. 5. Bangbon, P., Kanchanathaveekul, K., Thoy, U., Siribensanont, C., Channuwong, S., & Jia, Y. (2026). Generative AI and entrepreneurial psychological capital for sustainable SME performance: The roles of hope, resilience, and adaptive behavior in emerging economies according to SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being). Journal of Intelligent Decision Making and Information Science, 3(4s), 166-186. https://doi.org/10.59543/jidmis.v3.1002
  6. 6. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  7. 7. Bressler, D. M., Oltman, G., & Vallera, F. L. (2019). Social constructivist learning in mobile gaming environments: A case for collaborative play. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 30(4), 385–404.
  8. 8. Chaitip Na Songkhla. (2018). Components and processes for developing virtual reality systems in education. Journal of Education, Khon Kaen University, 42(2), 1–18.
  9. 9. Channuwong, S., Tongvijit, M., Photchanachan, S., Sun, R., & Jia, Y. (2026). Causal relationships among the factors influencing the competitive capability of Thai real estate companies based on the concept of sustainable cities and communities (UN SDG 11). Acta Innovations, 60, 81-95.
  10. https://doi.org/10.62441/actainnovations.v60i.684
  11. 10. Cho, Y., & Park, K. S. (2023). Designing immersive virtual reality simulation for environmental science education. Electronics, 12(2), 315. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics12020315
  12. 11. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
  13. 12. DeVellis, R. F. (2016). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  14. 13. Estrada-Araoz, A., et al. (2023). Environmental education and behavioral change in Peruvian basic education: A cross-sectional analysis. Latin American Journal of Education Studies, 48(1), 42–60.
  15. 14. Fei, Z., Channuwong, S., Bangbon, P., Siripap, P., & Jia, Y. (2026). Socioeconomic and adaptive determinants of sustainable agricultural development (SDG 2) in Thailand. Natural and Engineering Sciences, 11(2), 140-152.
  16. https://doi.org/10.28978/nesciences.262012
  17. 15. Filho, W. L., Shiel, C., & Paço, A. (2020). Integrative learning for sustainable development. Taylor & Francis.
  18. 16. Greenwald, S. W. (2023). Virtual reality in the classroom: A review of impact and instructional design. Journal of Educational Technology Research, 31(3), 210–230.
  19. 17. Jeerasak Nampradit, & Suthida Chaichomchuen. (2019). Components and development processes of virtual reality for learning in the Thai context. Journal of Learning Technology and Innovation, 11(2), 95–112.
  20. 18. Johnson-Glenberg, M. C., Birchfield, D. A., Tolentino, L., & Koziupa, T. (2016). Collaborative embodied learning in immersive virtual environments. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 3, 74.
  21. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2016.00074
  22. 19. Kanchanawanit, R. (2021). Social constructivist learning in digital communities. Journal of Education Research, 15(1), 21–34.
  23. 20. Makransky, G., & Mayer, R. E. (2022). Benefits of emotional design in virtual reality-based learningenvironments: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 34(3), 1293–1316.
  24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09666-1
  25. 21. Makransky, G., & Petersen, G. B. (2021). Investigating the process of learning with desktop virtual reality: A structural equation modeling approach. Computers & Education, 166, 104146.
  26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104146
  27. 22. Phasuk, N., Bangbon, P., Channuwong, S., Jia, Y., Nindya Saraswati, N. (2026). Risk management effectiveness and sustainable development in the insurance industry: Decent work and economic growth (SDG 8). Acta Innovations, 61, 707-723.
  28. 23. Phuttharak, N., & Sritong, S. (2024). Effects of VR learning on environmental attitudes and conservation behavior in Thai university students. Thai Journal of Environmental Education, 10(1), 41–59.
  29. 24. Plechatá, A., Lindeman, K., & Zimmermann, J. (2022). Virtual Reality in sustainable food education: Impact on systems thinking and consumer behavior. Environmental Psychology and Education, 19(3), 245–264.
  30. 25. Prasertsilp, S. (2020). A study of group collaboration integrated with VR to promote environmental conservation behavior among students. Journal of Learning Research, 15(2), 57–73.
  31. 26. Prompalat, W., et al. (2021). Design of virtual reality learning environment to foster Islamic art creativity. Journal of Ubiquitous Learning, 5(1), 43–59.
  32. 27. Queiroz, L., Monteiro, S., & Azevedo, F. (2023). Physical embodiment and message specificity in VR climate education. International Journal of Science Education, 45(1), 56–72.
  33. 28. Radianti, J., Majchrzak, T. A., Fromm, J., & Wohlgenannt, I. (2020). A systematic review of immersive virtual reality applications for higher education: Design elements, lessons learned, and research agenda. Computers & Education, 147, 103778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103778
  34. 29. Rambach, J., Lilligreen, G., Schäfer, A., Bankanal, R., & Wiebel, A. (2020). A survey on applications of augmented, mixed and virtual reality for nature and environment. arXiv preprint.
  35. https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.12024
  36. 30. Singthong, T. (2022). Applying constructivist principles in digital education. Journal of Educational Technology and Innovation, 13(1), 85–102.
  37. 31. Srikan, P., Pimdee, P., Leekitchwatana, P., & Narabin, A. (2021). A PBL and constructivist model in cloud environments. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM), 15(22), 68–83.
  38. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v15i22.24963
  39. 32. Sriprasert, N. (2023). Situated learning in Thai nursing education. Journal of Educational Practice, 7(3), 88–101.
  40. 33. Stoeckel, M. R. (2020). Literature review of constructivism in online science courses. arXiv preprint.
  41. https://arxiv.org/abs/2007.07745
  42. 34. Suebtrakul Tuntalanukul, P., Itsarangkun Na Ayudhya, P., & Thanaphakwatkul, C. (2024). VR and AR integration in nursing and cross-disciplinary education. Journal of Health Education Technology, 10(1), 12–27.
  43. 35. Wannapiroon, P., & Pimdee, P. (2022). Situated learning through digital platforms in Thailand. Thai Journal of Distance Education, 12(4), 123–136. [In Thai]
  44. 36. Youthao, S., Channuwong, S., Weerachareonchai, P., Dhammahansakul, N., Sun, R., & Jia, Y. (2026). An AI-Driven framework for smart micro-housing and sustainable urban development (SDG 11). Natural and Engineering Sciences, 11(2), 242-252. https://doi.org/10.28978/nesciences.262022