01
Background
02
Why Redesign
03
Design Strategy
04
Key Design Decisions
05
Impact
06
Reflection
07
Other Designs
Go to Top
ImmerseVR
Designing a VR Lesson-Planning Platform That Helps Educators Build Immersive Lessons Without 3D Expertise
Extended Reality
Web
B2C
Want to skim through this case study? I got you covered.
Here’s a 1 min TL;DR version.
Educators wanted to use VR in their classrooms but couldn't. Existing tools assumed 3D expertise, causing 80%+ drop-off before a single lesson was complete.
I designed ImmerseVR, a VR lesson-planning platform that allows educators to create immersive lessons without needing 3D or technical expertise.
TEAM
1 UX Designer (me)
2 UX Researchers (me + 1)
1 Team Lead
What I did?
I was the sole designer responsible for this design. I owned product strategy, core flows, and system design. I led 0→1 research, ideation, and product design.
What were the constraints?
Users: had only 15-20 mins to prep a lesson
Technical: no access to 3D modelling tools or skills but they needed assets
Platform: needs to work across different VR headsets and also on desktop for fallback
The Impact
Nominated for Best New Talent
UX Design Awards 2026
Awarded Funding by Indiana University
Awarded funding and signed MoU with Indiana University Hospital to further develop the platform for medical training
Here’s a quick walkthrough of the product
Jump to Solution
Diving deeper into the project
Let’s start from the beginning
During my time working as a Product Designer at Emergent Technology Lab at Indiana University, I was collaborating with K-12 educators and university professors to understand VR based teaching initiatives.
Early conversations with the educators revealed that...
initial observations
Most VR platforms aren’t designed around how educators teach, making VR lessons hard to plan, customize, and scale in real classrooms.
Prof. Zeb Wood
Media Arts and Science, Luddy School of Informatics
“I know what I want my students to learn, but when I open most VR tools, I’m not sure where to begin or how to turn my lesson into something usable”
This wasn't a motivation problem. Educators wanted to use VR.
So why weren’t they?
Research Overview
To find out, we conducted research across three user groups to understand where VR lesson planning breaks down:
Survey
36 Responses (19 instructors, 17 students)
Goal: Understand attitudes toward VR, current tool usage
Findings: 73% interested in VR teaching, only 12% succeeded
User Interviews
12 Participants
Goal: Deep understand their workflows and mental models
Findings: Users are more focused on the lessons and if the students can understand and perform well. Used to building lessons on slides.
In-person Observations
4 sessions
Screenshots from user interviews
Competitive Analysis
Next, we analyzed 8 VR platforms educators repeatedly mentioned in interviews:
Competitive Analysis
Main Finding:
Every platform was designed for content creators (3D artists, game developers). Not for educators who think in learning objectives, not polygons.
Key Insights
The problem was the complexity of existing VR lesson creation platforms for non-technical users
Drop-offs happened at first contact as the 3D interface was too intimidating and learning curve was high
my learning: The barrier was at the start of the product. Educators never got far enough to experience value. All the tools and mechanics was unfamiliar for non-technical users.
Market research showed that existing VR Tools nudged the users to think about the 3D space more than the learning outcome
my learning: Existing tools were designed for 3D artists and game developers. They required a high learning curve and increased their cognitive load.
Even completed lessons failed as students got lost without structure: getting lost in open environments, not sure what to interact and progress wasn’t measurable
my learning: Even when educators did create VR lessons, the lack of structure made learning ineffective.
Now that we understand the problem, who are our users?
K-12 teachers and university professors
Needs: Plan lessons, define learning outcomes, and assess understanding without needing to think about VR or 3D complexity.
Students
Needs: Follow a clear lesson flow, stay oriented in VR, and receive feedback that confirms learning progress.
VR lab instructors supporting educators
Support educators with minimal setup, predictable workflows, and fewer intervention points during class time.
Primary users
Secondary users
Detailed user personas
How I approached the problem
I treated this as a mental model problem, not a usability one
Most VR tools try to make 3D interfaces easier with better tutorials, simpler controls, guided onboarding. But the research told me something different: educators weren't struggling with complexity. They were struggling with unfamiliarity.
This reframe shifted my focus from teaching educators to use VR to designing VR that matches their mental model
Ideation
With these questions in mind, I explored two different approaches to VR lesson creation to test my assumption
User Testing
I asked 8 educators to complete the same task with both prototypes
We created quick, low-fidelity prototypes for both directions and tested it against the same task:
“Create a 2 step VR lesson on your subject that you can teach this week.”
scene first- mental model A
Educators felt intimidated on where to even begin
They hesitated at the blank canvas
Better onboarding doesn't fix an unfamiliar starting point
Where confidence broke: The moment they saw the 3D environment
lesson first- mental model B
Started stronger, educators liked defining goals first
The interface still felt unfamiliar and learning curve was high
Lacked visual anchors they trusted
Where confidence broke: When translating goals into VR structure
Neither approach worked. But Mental Model B helped me understand that we are going in the right direction.
I was making VR easier. But easier wasn't enough.
The Pivot
I returned to my research notes and the answer felt obvious:
100% of educators used slide-based tools (PowerPoint, Google Slides, Keynote)
Slides are how they plan, teach, and think
Every lesson follows the same structure: Context → Content → Activity → Assessment
Slides don't just provide a familiar interface, they provide structure and progression, which is the backbone of building every lesson.
Concept Testing
Before moving further, I had to validate my concept
I ran a quick concept test with 8 educators: "Imagine you could build a VR lesson using a slide-based structure. Walk me through how you'd create a lesson about the solar system."
Result: Without any interface, 100% described the same pattern using slides:
Context → Exploration → Reflection → Assessment
This matched exactly how they structure traditional lessons. The mental model transferred. I had my new direction. Slides.
The Solution
Designing a Familiar Way to Build VR Lessons in 3 Phases
Phase 1: Build
User pain point
“I know what I want to teach, but when I open VR tools, I don’t know where to start.”
Solution
In Build, each step is a self-contained unit like a slide. They have:
A scene (3D environment selected from presets)
Content overlays (2D text, images, prompts)
A defined purpose (context, exploration, reflection, assessment)
This uses mental model alignment from UX psychology, matching the system’s structure to how educators already plan lessons, which reduces cognitive load and increases confidence when using VR tools.
Final Design
Iteration 2
Iteration 1
Phase 2: Interact
User pain point
“I don’t know how to make my VR scene interactive, and I don’t understand technical logic.”
Solution
The Interact phase uses simple, guided interaction cards that let educators define what happens when a student touches or selects an object. These interactions become reusable flow cards that can be applied to multiple objects across the lesson.
This follows the principle of progressive disclosure, revealing complexity only when needed and making interaction design approachable for non-technical users.
Final Design
Iteration 2
Iteration 1
Phase 3: Assess
User pain point
“I can’t tell if students actually understood the lesson in VR.”
Solution
The Assess phase allows educators to insert built-in assessment blocks directly into the VR lesson. These blocks helps instructors test the students while immersed in the experience.
This supports learning feedback loops, ensuring that VR is not just engaging, but educationally effective.
Final Design
Iteration 2
Iteration 1
Supporting Features
Beyond the lesson builder, we designed supporting interfaces: Instructor and Student Dashboard
These dashboards give instructors and students one place to create, manage, and access VR lessons, turning the platform into a LMS
Instructor Dashboard
✅ Centralizes lesson creation, editing, and publishing in one workspace
✅ Enables easy reuse and iteration of lessons across classes
✅ Controls student access and lesson distribution like an LMS
Student Dashboard
✅ Gives students a clear entry point to access assigned VR lessons
✅ Explore 3D immersive lessons on desktop as a backup; exit VR space anytime
✅ Supports guided, self-paced exploration of VR lessons
Next Phase
That’s a wrap!
The project has been awarded funding from Indiana University and has signed a MoU with IU Health to further develop this platform to train medical students. This is an exciting step for us to lead this project to deployment!
Key Takeaways
Taking the time to reflect
REMINDER
Multiple iterations failed and that was necessary
Testing approaches that failed felt like waste of time but they forced me to ask a different questions. Exploring wrong directions led us to the right one.
REMINDER
Strong ideas need stronger communication
Working on an unconventional concept taught me how to navigate pushback with clarity, data, empathy, and thoughtful discussion across diverse perspectives.
REMINDER
familiar user mental models reduce fear of complex tools
I started by trying to make VR controls more powerful, but soon, I had to learn to design from users’ existing mental models instead. Sometimes the solution is simple and already in front of you.