Reviews for Academic Stream - Doctoral Colloquium Paper (Oral Presentation in DC session) Thank you for supporting iLRN’s peer review process. Your careful and ethical evaluation ensures a high standard of research in immersive learning. Please review each submission  fairly, confidentially, and professionally , using the criteria provided in the  review form  while following established international ethical guidelines listed below. The review form is embedded in EasyChair (have a look at  this page  to see how to add your review). Paper Type Please consider the paper type when reviewing. You can find more information on the Academic Stream on this website:  https://www.immersivelrn.org/ilrn2026/academic-stream/ Doctoral Colloquium 4-7 pages, incl. references iLRN Conference Proceedings template for oral presentation in the DC session Both doctoral level as well as master’s by research students/candidates are eligible to submit to the doctoral colloquium (DC). The DC will be held as a session in addition to the regular paper sessions, with students presenting their research to each other (in English). You can find more information on the Doctoral Colloquium here: https://www.immersivelrn.org/ilrn2026/doctoral-colloquium-dc/   Doctoral Colloquium submissions are thus contributions by (Doctoral) Students, usually about their doctoral project or a specific study from it. Please consider this in your review. What to Evaluate In the EasyChair form, please provide ratings on: Potential Contribution to Immersive Learning Research How much does the submission (potentially) contribute to research on learning, instruction, teaching or education with immersive technologies? Please keep in mind that the scope of the conference includes research on learning (education/teaching/training/instruction/...) WITH immersive technology (VR/AR/XR/MR/games/360°...), so both components should be clearly included in the submission. Please also check if the submission fits well to the topic that it was submitted to. Otherwise please suggest a better fitting topic ( https://www.immersivelrn.org/ilrn2026/call-for-papers/#program-tracks ). Justify your review in the field "Comments for the Authors" below. Originality and innovation How original and innovative is this contribution? How novel and unique are the proposed approach, methods, or ideas? Justify your review by providing constructive feedback to the authors to improve their contribution in the field "Comments for the Authors" below. Proposed Methodological/theoretical design When evaluating the project at its current phase of development, how comprehensive and robust is the proposed methodological or theoretical design of this submission, whether it's an initial concept or a fully realized study? For empirical research, consider if the experimental design, data collection methods, and analysis plans are thoughtfully constructed and feasibly actionable, showing a deep grasp of the research challenge. For theoretical research, examine whether the framework or conclusions are solidly grounded, logically coherent, and poised for a meaningful contribution to the field. Justify your review by providing constructive feedback to the proposal submitters to improve their contribution in the field "Comments for the Authors" below. Conclusions, Limitations, and/or Expected Outcomes Assessing the current development stage of the project, how well-defined and promising are the conclusions and recommendations or next steps and future directions as outlined by the authors, whether it's an initial concept or a fully realized study? Evaluate whether the authors have effectively communicated the potential advancements and broader implications stemming from their initial empirical findings or theoretical developments, while also acknowledging and planning for any limitations. Justify your review by providing constructive feedback to the proposal submitters to improve their contribution in the field "Comments for the Authors" below. Quality of writing and academic style Is the text error free (spelling, syntax, grammar)? Is the text comprehensible to the academic community? Justify your review by providing constructive feedback to the authors to improve their contribution in the field "Comments for the Authors" below. Anchoring in relevant and current literature How well is the paper anchored in relevant immersive learning research literature? Does it provide appropriate citation of related work in the field? Justify your review by providing constructive feedback to the authors to improve their contribution in the field "Comments for the Authors" below. Compliance with iLRN Proceedings style/formatting and referencing guidelines, including use of the respective template  Does the paper comply with the iLRN template and guidelines ( https://publications.immersivelrn.org/index.php/academic/templates )? Justify your review by providing constructive feedback to the authors to improve their contribution in the field "Comments for the Authors" below. If helpful, recommend a more appropriate paper category to support the authors. Which category would be most appropriate for this paper? Would you recommend the author/s to submit a revised version of the paper to another category? The author/s will be required to revise their paper as necessary to comply with the relevant page limits, and the paper will be reviewed again. Optional: If you want, you can add explanations in the text box. Overall Evaluation Please provide the overall evaluation for the submission. Should it be accepted for publication in the conference proceedings and presentation at iLRN2025? For all categories, revisions of papers based on the reviewers' comments should be made. Justify your review by providing constructive feedback to the authors to improve their contribution in the field "Comments for the Authors" below. Constructive, Ethical & Objective Review iLRN adheres to recognized peer-review ethics. Reviewers are expected to follow: COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers   https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/cope-ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers iLRN Publications Ethics & Malpractice Statement  ( Reviewers’ Responsibilities )  https://www.immersivelrn.org/about/publications-ethics-and-malpractice-statement/ Springer Nature Reviewer Guidelines   https://www.springer.com/gp/editorial-policies/peer-review-policy-process   Your comments to authors should: Explain and justify all ratings Identify  strengths and weaknesses Offer  specific, actionable suggestions Use a  respectful, unbiased, and professional  tone --> Do not include personal judgments or assumptions about author identity, background, location, or intent. --> Maintain confidentiality - do not share, store externally, or reuse content. --> Do not upload manuscripts into generative AI tools , per COPE and Springer Nature policies. Evidence-Based Evaluation For  empirical  contributions: Clear research questions and rationale Appropriate methodology and execution Transparent reporting of  results ,  limitations , and  implications For  theoretical/conceptual  contributions: Logical and coherent argumentation Grounding in recognized scholarly literature Clear advancement of conceptual understanding in the field Evaluate  only what is presented  in the manuscript. Literature & Research Integrity Assess whether: Prior work in immersive learning research (i.e. prior ILRN conference proceedings) is  properly cited The contribution is  clearly contextualized  within the field Citation practices meet  academic integrity  norms If you suspect  plagiarism, fabricated data, or ethical issues : → Report concerns via  Confidential feedback to the program committee only. Overall Recommendation When rating acceptance suitability: Consider both the  importance of the contribution  and the  feasibility of revisions Ensure alignment between  ratings ,  recommendation , and  review narrative Even when recommending rejection , include  constructive feedback  to help the authors improve Reviewer Confidence & Confidential Notes Indicate your  true level of expertise  in the confidence field Use confidential notes only for  communication with Program Committee Chairs   (not to authors) Award Nominations Nominate a paper only if it demonstrates: Outstanding rigor, originality, clarity, and impact Clear potential to  advance immersive learning research Thank You! Your thoughtful review contributes to: Excellence  in scholarly publication A  fair and supportive  academic review culture Growth and  advancement  of the immersive learning community For any questions related to ethics or review standards, please reach out to the  iLRN2026 Program Chairs  or the  iLRN Scientific Quality Assurance Team .