An Exploratory Study on Virtual Reality and Related Technologies in Terminal LIS Degree Programs in the United States and South Korea

2.1 Libraries and Librarians in Virtual Worlds

Librarians and libraries have been active in virtual worlds, such as Second Life, for almost two decades. Within virtual worlds such as Second Life and Kitely⁶⁾, librarians have created virtual libraries and offered a wide variety of digital collections of e-books and other electronic media as well as virtual reference services (Chow et al, 2012; Dey, 2012; Grassian & Trueman, 2007; Hill, et al., 2017; Mon, 2012; Parry, 2008; Webber & Nahl, 2011). Virtual worlds and virtual reality have also been used in Library and Information Science education to train pre-service librarians in skills they need for the real world as well as the virtual world (Condic, 2009). VR has also been used for educating library users about how to use library collections and services (Chen & Tasi, 2012; Lim, 2021; Tudin, 2016).

2.2 VR, AR, MR, & XR in Public Libraries in the United States

Kim et al. (2021) showed that as of 2020, 11 U.S. public libraries provide VR services (mostly contents for travel and exploration) that allow users to wear actual HMD gear and controllers and participate in serial sessions (not one-time base trial). In most public libraries, users need to take the librarian-led VR training session or certificate prior to participating in the session and minor users (children and teenagers) should submit the consent form signed by their parents (Kim et al., 2021). Kim (2020) notes that most libraries using VR and related technologies are supplying access to existing VR content and hardware, and that there is a need for more accessible and high-quality content.

Clark (2019), a new media librarian at a Public Library in Illinois, describes and explains how their library used various VR hardware and software to support a neutral and informal learning environment. Clark (2019) suggests that libraries can use the high market penetration and ownership of smartphones to provide access to XR content and applications without needing to invest as much into their own infrastructure, at least for those who have access to smartphones. Clark (2019) also argues that free and open standards and technologies, such as WebWR (now WebXR Device API⁷⁾) are important for sustainability and accessibility of XR content.

Through interviews with public librarians in the Washington State area, Lee et al. (2020) found that while public librarians saw the educational potential and social value in VR, there were challenges, such as lack of suitable VR content, space limitations, privacy concerns, limited accessibility for those with physical or cognitive disabilities, among other reasons. Lee et al. (2020) argue that librarians need to think carefully about how they define marginalized communities in their local contexts when planning, promoting, and assessing the success of their VR programs. They also suggest that librarians should plan alternative ways for users with mobility or cognitive issues to engage with VR content as well as consider meaningfully engaging their community to support them in creating their own relevant VR content. Continuing from the previous study, through surveys with librarians and patrons who participated in drop-in VR programs at several public libraries in Washington State, Dahya et al. (2021) found that most of the patron participants were white boys or men or had previous experience with video games, suggesting that the interest or appeal of VR library programming may be demographically limited and that libraries and librarians may need to rethink how to market and engage diverse and marginalized parts of their library communities.

2.3 VR, AR, MR, & XR in Public Libraries in South Korea

As information communication technologies of Big Data, Artificial Intelligence (A.I), Cloud Computing, and Internet of Things (IoT) were rapidly introduced into the library setting, Library and Information Science researchers found that both users (especially young generation including Y generation, Millennials, or Z generation) and librarians have high interests and demands in next generation digital library services of makerspace, big data, AR/VR, 3D printing, digital textbook, RFID and others (Noh, 2014a; Noh, 2014b; Park et al., 2018). To extend the nature and scope of traditional user programs in libraries for the Post COVID-19 era, public libraries should increase provision of educational, recreational, and cultural user programs using VR/AR/MR technologies along with other online services (Noh et al., 2020).

Libraries have started to adopt immersive media-based reading programs for children's reading promotion such as interactive storytelling and AR/VR books (National Library for Children and Young Adults, 2020). As of 2020, 19 out of 1,134 public libraries provide VR services (Kim et al., 2021). Most public libraries offer one-time services for young kids, juvenile users, and their family that they mainly use Smartphone, Google Cardboard, and Kits (only few VR headsets or HMDs) to teach them the concept of Virtual Reality and utilize VR for operating subject specific programs such as reading VR books, drawing webtoons, and DIY VR and VR games (Kim et al., 2021). This research suggests that public libraries should provide serial VR services at a regular time interval for maximizing immersive interaction in the areas of Explore (e.g., Nature, Universe), Create (Interaction with virtual objects), Learn (Combination of Explore and Create), and Play (e.g., Games) by letting users experience VR headsets and controllers (Kim et al., 2021). To conduct sustainable VR service in the library, it is critical for librarians to obtain, design, and run quality educational programs as well as they need to take proper training to enhance their knowledge and competencies using VR technologies (Park et al., 2018; Kim et al., 2021).

2.4 VR, AR, MR, & XR in Academic Libraries in the United States

As of 2020, 44 out of 116 Academic Research Libraries (ARLs) member university libraries provide AR or VR services (Lee & Chung, 2020). Through surveying websites of forty-four university libraries, they mostly hire multiple librarians and technicians and provide VR services as forms of checking out VR headsets and spaces for courses, research, and one-time experiences, offering educational and consulting sessions for VR content development as well as demonstration (Lee & Chung, 2020). Like Clark (2019) above, Hahn (2017) describes a variety of VR technologies and how they can be used for research and teaching in the academic library context. Hahn (2017) explains that VR can help provide first-year experience training for new students, use MX headsets like the Microsoft HoloLens⁸⁾ for immersive e-books readings, virtual visualization of statistical data and analyses, as well as a part of library makerspaces. Hahn (2017) notes that academic librarians should try to keep up to date on new developments on this rapidly evolving area using popular media sources, such as The Verge⁹⁾, Wired Magazine¹⁰⁾, or eWeek¹¹⁾, which could also help them discover or think of new ways to use VR technologies. Hahn et al. (2019) describe how academic libraries can support and sustain virtual reality applications across institutions and departments by archiving 3D and VR content, offering instructional and design support to faculty who want to teach with VR as well as faculty and students interested in using VR for research or content development.

In assessing whether to expand their VR technologies collections and services, Frost et al. (2020) conducted a survey and focus group with the library users at Brigham Young University. While most of their VR users were male students majoring in STEM fields, they also found that students from all backgrounds as well as faculty from the Arts & Humanities and Social Sciences were using the one VR headset on offer, an HTC VIVE system¹²⁾ usable only in the library. They found enough use and interest to invest in more VR technology and plan to circulate it if possible. While academic use of their VR was lower than expected, they plan to market their VR technologies more widely across their campus and different departments knowing it had a broader appeal based on their survey and focus group findings. Hannah et al. (2019) argue that VR and AR technologies should be used in academic libraries to support the Humanities and Social Sciences and describe a collaboration between the academic libraries and College of Liberal Arts at Purdue University that is planning a repository for 3D content. They argue that VR and AR technologies could be leveraged to forge new interdisciplinary collaborations across campus and that libraries should anticipate and be ready for change.

Colegrove (2018) describes lessons learned from the DeLaMare Science & Engineering Library at the University of Nevada, Reno, where AR and VR technologies were added to the lending collection to allow for circulation and use outside the library. Colegrove (2018) notes that they created detailed cataloging records and procedures for checking and cleaning the equipment upon return as well as some tips, such as using VR headsets with replaceable foam face interfaces for easy sanitation and built-in earphones for better usability, and cable management systems for more permanent setups. Colegrove (2018) noted that the circulated equipment helped support more interaction with the computer science and engineering faculty members, new course development, and installation of permanent VR and AR spaces in the library. There were persistent challenges related to the prohibitive costs and new technology developments needed to make full use of the technology, as well as software licensing and security issues.

Examining VR programming and services within the academic libraries at Temple University and the University of Oklahoma Clark, and Lischer-Katz (2020) identified several concerns for ensuring the accessibility of VR programs and services to disabled users. They suggest that librarians should plan for accessibility from the start; be aware that there may not be accessible VR standards and to seek other related standards or establish their own; have developer support that is available and knowledgeable of accessibility issues; include means for collective feedback and assessing user experiences; to use VR as a means to an end rather than the main focus; and to be aware of the accessibility limitations of VR and be able to provide alternative experiences and options (Clark & Lischer-Katz, 2020, p. 8).

VR and related technologies seem to have been adopted in medical and health sciences specialized academic libraries across the United States (Moore et al., 2018). For example, through collaborations with surgeons, doctors, nurses, and researchers, librarians at the Health Sciences Library (HSL) at the University of Washington established a room-scale virtual reality space, called the Translational Research and Information Lab, TRAIL) to facilitate cardiothoracic pre-surgical consultations (Bardyn et al., 2018). Napa et al. (2019) evaluated two of the VR apps developed through collaborations in TRAIL and explored the librarians’ roles in the process. Napa et al. (2019) found that while some clinicians were unsure how the librarians could support the collaborations, some suggested that librarians can help the clinicians by creating repositories of VR images for training purposes as well as facilitating and maintaining the VR technologies and space. Relatedly, Lischer-Katz et al. (2019) found a variety of issues affecting the curation and preservation of 3D and VR data in academic libraries ranging from documentation, ethical and legal issues, and research transparency and reproducibility. They address these issues, they recommend involving a diverse stakeholders and software engineers when drafting preservation plans, make system purchasing or designing decisions based on future compatibility, to keep up to date on digital media preservation practices from related fields, and to take a lifecycle approach to handling 3D and VR data.

2.5 VR, AR, MR, & XR in Academic Libraries in South Korea

It is an early stage of libraries adopting VR services in Korea and university libraries are leading parties with most resources. Lee and Chung (2020) shows that only 4 university libraries in Korea have adopted and provided VR services including one time trial based user programs, library tours, training programs to support VR content creation, and checking out VR software/hardware (HMD gears, VR ready PCs, Screen, Content Creation Software such as Unity, Unreal, etc.) and spaces as well as consulting programs for applying VR technologies to specific course contents or research. From surveying university students who visited and used VR services, Lee and Chung (2020) shows that users are mostly satisfied with the facilities (devices and spaces) and quality of VR contents they used, they are relatively unsatisfied with the level of technical expertise of librarians or service staff. However, the study shows that users express high prospects for using VR technologies and related library services for their future education, research, and career development (Lee & Chung, 2020). Kwon (2019) also investigated college students’ perception, experience, and needs for VR services and addressed that students’ interests in VR technologies are high while understanding of the VR technologies is relatively low. In addition, most students (74%) experienced the VR technologies for entertainment purposes at PC cafes while they attended user programs at libraries and or museums (4%). Regarding their preference for VR contents that libraries (regardless the types of libraries) can provide, students choose technologies such as Engineering, Medicine, Natural Sciences as well as Humanities, Social Sciences, and Arts to experience active engagement and immersive interaction that is hard to be experienced in real worlds (Kwon, 2019). Kwon (2019) argues that libraries need to develop and provide users with quality educational VR contents so that users easily learn, adopt, and continuously enjoy VR technologies.

Kwon and Koo (2020) surveyed university librarians in Korea and found that librarians currently do not have much previous experience of using VR technologies and thus have little knowledge and skills to employ VR technologies into library services. However, university librarians understand the educational and recreational values of VR services for their users and highly demand opportunities to gain experience and adopt VR technologies into library services (Kwon & Koo, 2020). Regarding the service areas for VR technologies to be used in university library settings, Simulation: experiments and practical training (such as job interview simulation, STEM experiments, and surgery simulation) is ranked in the first place, followed by Library tours and tutorials, Library Materials and Contents for teaching and or research (that can be easily provided in virtual setting), Library User Education (such as reading programs, information literacy education, bibliography education, etc.), and Library User Programs related to arts, music, travel, and other recreational and cultural purposes (Kwon & Koo, 2020).

From previous research regarding VR and university libraries, it is shown that even though both users and librarians are highly interested in and aware of the current VR technologies and services, they have limited experience, knowledge, and skills of using VR technologies. This shows the importance of training newly appointed pre-service librarians and in-service librarians at all types of libraries (Park et al., 2018; Kim et al., 2021; Kwon & Koo, 2020; Lee & Chung, 2020) as well as developing VR related courses in LIS curriculum for educating future librarians in advance (Kim et al., 2021).

4.1 Course Title & Description Content Analysis

Of the 54 ALA-accredited master’s in LIS degree programs in the United States, six out of 54 (11.11%) had at least one course covering virtual reality, 4 (7.41%) had at least one course covering augmented reality, 2 (3.70%) covered mixed reality, and 1 (1.85%) covered extended reality. Nineteen (35.19%) programs covered related terms and topics. In particular, 16 (29.63%) covered emerging or new trends or technologies and 3 (5.56%) included courses on virtual environments or communities. Of the courses that covered VR, four were electives specifically on the topic, three were special topic courses focused on VR and AR applications, and one covered VR in the context of makerspaces. Two universities in the US had two courses specifically on VR and AR available; both are iSchools. Additionally, all the LIS programs in the US covering these topics are iSchools. Only programs that covered VR also covered AR, XR, and MR; there were no programs that covered AR, XR, or MR and did not also cover VR.

Of the 37 LIS bachelor’s degree programs at universities in South Korea, one out 37 (2.70%) universities had one course covering virtual reality and a different university had one course including augmented reality. Eleven university LIS degree programs (29.73%) included courses on related terms and concepts. More specifically, nine university programs (24.32%) had LIS courses focusing on technology, two university programs (5.41%) had LIS courses covering new media, and one university program (2.70%) had a course on immersive media. One South Korean university had two courses that covered VR, though within courses about digital information services, immersive media, and makerspaces. Another South Korean university covered AR in an information services course. Neither of these universities are iSchools.

The overall findings described above are summarized in Table 1 below. Given the nature of the nominal data collected and small sample sizes, statistical comparisons are not particularly useful. Chi-squared and Fisher’s exact tests did not find any statistically significant differences between the frequency of observations between the US and South Korean samples.

Table 1.

VR & Related Topics in Terminal LIS Degree Programs in the United States & South Korea

4.2 Syllabi Content Analysis

The content of the most recent syllabi for courses with titles and descriptions that explicitly mention VR and related technologies were also collected if they were publicly available on the respective institutional websites. Four out of the 6 LIS programs in the United States that included VR or related technologies in their course titles or descriptions also provided public access to their syllabi and none of the South Korean LIS programs provided access to their course websites. Six course syllabi from the 4 XR-inclusive LIS programs in the US were collected and analyzed using open coding and key themes identified from the literature review, as discussed below.

4.2.2 Course Content

All the courses covered or introduced core concepts and theoretical and practical aspects of VR and related technologies. Technical skills such as interface design, user experience research, prototyping, and computer programming were covered. General skills such as collaboration, teamwork, project management and planning, usability testing, evaluation, and assessment were also common. Technical and general skills were taught through direct instruction as well as developed through coursework as described above.

However, there were two contexts in which the courses were presented: general or LIS-oriented. Four of the courses fell into the general context and were more broadly focused on the design of virtual or augmented user experiences, user interfaces, visualizations, and environments. Two of the courses specially presented the content in direct connection with their use and applications within libraries, museums, makerspaces, or other information organizations. These courses presented content and focused coursework on the use and applications of VR and related technologies to provide content, programming, and services to library or information users as well as skills related to needs assessment, cost analysis, and return on investment.

In relation to the three key themes identified in the literature review (stakeholder partnerships, content development, and inclusion and accessibility), all the courses addressed content development. Both LIS-oriented courses addressed issues related to both stakeholder partnerships and inclusion and accessibility. While some of the general courses addressed issues related to stakeholder partnerships and accessibility, such as user experience, usability, evaluation, and assessment, none of them seemed to focus on issues related to inclusion, such as diversity and social justice.

In general, the courses referred to VR, AR, MR, or XR technologies as broad categories when describing course content. However, some of the courses did identify specific software applications, programming languages, hardware, and other technologies that are covered or used in the courses. Of note, Unity was identified in half of the courses. The complete listing can be seen in Table 2.

Table 2.

Alphabetical Listing of Software, Programming Languages, Hardware, & Other Technologies Covered with Frequencies

5.1 Key Themes from the Selected Literature Review

While brief, the selected literature view identified some key themes that could be used to help develop course content and best practices for integrating VR related technologies into libraries and LIS education. Three interrelated themes are discussed below: stakeholder partnerships; content develop ment; and inclusion and accessibility.

5.2 Discussion of the Curricula Content Analysis Findings

As mentioned above and given the small sample sizes, it does not appear that the observed occurrences of VR, AR, MR, or XR between terminal LIS degree programs in the US and South Korea are meaningfully different, statistically speaking. Overall, there are few courses that cover VR, AR, MR, or XR in terminal LIS programs in either the United States or South Korea. However, there were some observed differences in how the topics are offered in courses between the United States and South Korea. In the United States, most of the courses covering VR, AR, and related topics are established electives specifically focused on the topics whereas the courses in South Korea covering VR and AR were broader in scope, not specifically or solely focused on VR, etc. There were also a few special topics courses in the United States and seemingly none in South Korea at the time of data collection. Special topics courses are commonly used to pilot new course topics and designs prior to officially adding them to the curriculum, which often involves a lengthy approval process given academic bureaucracy and curricular standards. As such, it could be expected to see more special topics courses in the US and South Korea on VR, AR, and related subjects before more permanent electives are established or approved.

The observation that all the terminal LIS programs in the US that cover VR and related technologies are iSchools and that neither of two South Korean universities can be explained simply because the iSchool movement originated in the US and expanded more rapidly there than in South Korea. Cross-referenced with the iSchool’s directory, the research team found that thirty-five of the 54 (64.81%) of ALA-accredited LIS programs in the United States are iSchools, while just six out of 37 (16.21%) university LIS programs in South Korea are iSchools¹⁴⁾. The iSchools movement represents a shift in LIS programs from a primary focus on librarianship to the broader information professions to be more responsive to nascent trends related to technology and industry (iSchools Inc, 2017). As such, it could be reasoned that iSchools are more likely to embrace and integrate VR and related technologies into their curricula. However, just 6 (17.14%) of the 35 US iSchools in the sample covered VR. In addition to the other findings, this suggests that course development on VR, AR, MR, and XR are still in the preliminary stages.

As mentioned in the literature review, VR technologies and hardware are expensive and may be perceived as a trend or fad that may pass (DuBose, 2020). At least two of the courses covering VR are within the context of makerspaces, which may suggest those institutions have or have access to a makerspace with VR and other technologies already available. Additionally, given the cost and hardware requirements, it may not be affordable or feasible for students to afford or access the technology. Given the ongoing pandemic, students may not have been able to access VR hardware on campuses because of social distancing guidelines and online classes or other issues related to budget and supply chain. Some institutions may be using the special topics courses to gauge interest in the topic or whether VR becomes more widely adopted before investing in the related equipment and course development.

As Ball (2021) noted above, VR is sometimes mistakenly conflated with video gaming. While negative claims about games and gaming persist, games, even recreational ones, have been found to promote a variety of valuable digital literacy skills and pro-social behaviors (Gee 2003; Gee, 2009; Galarneau & Zibit, 2011; Martin, 2011; Martin & Steinkuehler, 2010). These negative perspectives may, if held by librarians, library administrators, LIS educators, lead to disinterest or ignorance in adopting VR and related technologies if their value is misunderstood or dismissed. Greene and Groenendyk (2018) argue that the overlap between or fusion of the entertainment and educational content and experiences enabled by VR and AR technologies can allow for innovations for education, research, and beyond. Of course, library collections are not just for professional, academic, or nonfiction resources. Nicholson (2013) notes that games and other recreational media have been common in US libraries since the mid-nineteenth century.

Relatedly, previous related research found that while gaming is a global, multibillion dollar industry and prevalent in public libraries across the US (Nicholson, 2009), games and gaming are not a common topic in LIS curricula in the United States and that LIS educators that had more gaming experience and experience with multiple genres of games, among other reasons, were more likely to include or use them in their classes (Elkins & Hollister, 2020). According to adult learning theory, also known as andragogy, adult learners, like most LIS students, are more interested in learning new topics if they can relate to existing interests or can understand the value of learning more about the new topic (Taylor & Kroth, 2009). By exposing games and explaining their educational value to pre-service librarians during their coursework, they were more likely to understand their value as part of the library and curriculum (Martin & Martinez, 2016). If these trends are the same for virtual reality and other related technologies, then their inclusion in the LIS curriculum could help new librarians and information professionals to be ready for new adventures into the metaverse using VR.

Regarding Library and Information Science (LIS) led course development, building information and digital literacy instruction programs such as VR-based library tours, VR-based reference service, VR-based reading programs could be an appropriate place to start (Chow et al., 2012; Mon, 2012; Kwon, 2019; Sample, 2020; Smith, 2019). Kwon (2019) recommended that libraries should provide VR-based information literacy educational programs and various information services and Sample (2020) showed that AR/VR-based information literacy instruction programs (VR tours) reduced library anxiety in international students and returning or nontraditional students. Despite high interest in VR among librarians in South Korea, most do not have sufficient knowledge of or exposure to VR technologies. As such, Kim et al. (2021) and Park et al. (2018) advocate the development and opening of courses and training programs about VR and related technologies for pre- and in-service librarians in South Korea. Given the findings above, the authors would extend this argument to terminal LIS programs and professional development training in the US as well.

5.3 Limitations & Future Work

In addition to the nature of the study and small sample sizes, there are other limitations of this study. Data was collected from the respective institutional websites during January of 2022. As with all websites, the information on the websites could have been out-of-date or updated after the data collection period. As such, future work on this area could revisit and compare the curricula after another year to see if there are new trends or technologies. Similarly, the findings above are limited to the course titles, descriptions, and syllabi that were publicly available. While course titles and descriptions were accessible on each of the websites of institutions sampled, the course descriptions on the websites could be shorter than their counterparts on course syllabi, and syllabi were not readily available nor accessible on many of the websites. Given resource constraints of this study, collection of all the syllabi that were not publicly available was not feasible. As such, future work should include a more comprehensive collection and analysis of course syllabi as well as surveys, interviews, observations, or focus groups with LIS educators, scholars, and practitioners and on their views and use of VR, AR, MR, XR, and other immersive technologies. Further exploration and description of these areas could help develop an educational framework, model, or curricular standards and identify more evidence-based best practices. Additionally, the scope of the above literature review was limited due to scope and space requirements. Future work could also include an expanded, more comprehensive review of research and professional literature on VR and related technologies in libraries and LIS education.