electronics

Article A Case Study of Educational Games in Virtual Reality as a Teaching Method of Lean Management

Martin Krajˇcoviˇc,Gabriela Gabajová * , Beáta Furmannová, Vladimír Vavrík, Martin Gašo and Marián Matys

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Žilina, 010 26 Žilina, Slovakia; [email protected] (M.K.); [email protected] (B.F.); [email protected] (V.V.); [email protected] (M.G.); [email protected] (M.M.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +421-41-513-2731

Abstract: (1) At present, it is important to bring the latest technologies from industrial practice into the teaching process of educational institutions, including universities. The presented case study addresses the application of educational games in virtual reality to the teaching process in a university environment. (2) The study took place at the Department of Industrial Engineering of the University of Žilina in Žilina and consisted of two phases. In the first phase, students’ satisfaction with current teaching methods was examined. The second phase focused on an educational game in virtual reality, which introduced a non-traditional approach for teaching lean management, namely the tool 5S. (3) This game was designed by the study authors and created in the Godot game engine. The educational game was provided to students during class. After completing the game,



participants were asked to fill out a questionnaire. The aim was to enable students to express their
 opinion on the educational game and to identify the main benefits of this approach in the teaching

Citation: Krajˇcoviˇc,M.; Gabajová, G.; process. (4) In the study’s final phase, based on the acquired knowledge, the authors examined the Furmannová, B.; Vavrík, V.; Gašo, M.; benefits and disadvantages of virtual reality educational games for the teaching process of industrial Matys, M. A Case Study of engineering tools. Educational Games in Virtual Reality as a Teaching Method of Lean Keywords: educational game; virtual reality; game engine; Godot; 5S Management. Electronics 2021, 10, 838. https://doi.org/10.3390/ electronics10070838 1. Introduction Academic Editors: Osvaldo Gervasi The concept of Industry 4.0 resonates in the field of industrial engineering in a sig- and JungYoon Kim nificant manner. In the industrial environment of the Slovak Republic, Industry 4.0 can be understood as an extensive transformation of the entire field of industrial production Received: 17 March 2021 into a highly integrated value chain through the connection of digital technologies and Accepted: 30 March 2021 Published: 1 April 2021 robotics with conventional industry [1]. The Industry 4.0 concept is based on the use of the Internet of Things, cloud computing, cyber-physical systems, and the use of virtual

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral reality [2]. Other core prerequisites for the implementation of Industry 4.0 are digitization with regard to jurisdictional claims in and the digital factory. The digital factory provides a 3D representation of computer and published maps and institutional affil- information technologies that collaborate to create an integrated environment. In the iations. context of Industry 4.0, the digital factory provides an important foundation for advanced manufacturing systems. Digitization currently allows factories to prepare for revolutionary changes and digital conversion of the entire factory [3]. The design of production systems is linked with the use of a wide range of modern tools and technologies. These are now known as Advanced Industrial Engineering (AIE) [4]. The tools of the digital factory are Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. used in the design of new production systems, in the optimization of existing production This article is an open access article and logistics systems, and for the detailed design of workplaces. Lean management tools distributed under the terms and are also closely related to the design and optimization of production and logistics systems. conditions of the Creative Commons The Department of Industrial Engineering at the University of Žilina has focused on Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// the field of the digital factory for several years. Among other things, students are taught creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ lean management techniques during the classes for the subjects Digital Enterprise, Opera- 4.0/). tions Management, Design of Production and Assembly Systems, Design of Production

Electronics 2021, 10, 838. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10070838 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/electronics Electronics 2021, 10, 838 2 of 20

Processes. The university is clearly both a research institution an educational institution, therefore we are constantly looking for methods to improve the teaching process while bringing students the latest knowledge and technology from practice. Consequently, the intersection of practice and the educational environment with the use of modern virtual reality technologies is the core of the presented study. Grabinger [5] notes the need for change in education to encourage students to think independently and learn to solve problems. The current system of education leads students to memorization, which may cause a misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the basic context. Educational institutions are increasingly struggling to motivate their students [6]. One of the possible solutions to this complex problem appears to be the use of the moti- vational power of games and the application of gamification to the teaching process of universities. However, a significant long-term problem is how to incorporate the curricu- lum of selected subjects into games to achieve the goal of learning through playing [7]. In her study, Putz [8] states that gamification leads to better retention of knowledge and has a positive impact on learning activities. The image of traditional games drastically changes and thus creates space for the use of educational games. Connecting the educational process with the game world can motivate students and show them that education can also be fun. At the same time, it provides teachers with a powerful tool, because scientific information and technological knowledge are innovative factors that expand the abilities of an individual [9]. Virtual reality is considered to be a technology that allows users to obtain immersive information [10] while providing a wide range of sustainability options [11]. Virtual reality research is now gradually shifting from laboratories to various applications in the scientific, medical, and educational fields [12,13]. The use of virtual reality has been justified in education, especially in those areas where training in real conditions can be either dangerous and risky, or expensive and complicated [14].

2. Previous Research The benefits of virtual reality education have been explored by several studies. The results of these studies show that the appropriate ratio of the correct game design and the curriculum complexity increases the student’s motivation to learn [15]. In his study, Kang [16] describes the current state of training content in educational institutions and proposes a model adapted to industrial demand. The results of this study suggest that the cooperative relationship between education and industry is crucial for effective training. In his study, Kim [17] presents a trend in games and techniques for immersive interac- tion. In his publication, he proposes an immersive model of game content using Unified Modeling Language (UML) based on virtual reality, which he considers to be a more effective method than using general flowcharts. Yoon [18] noted that existing game-based education emphasizes the importance of entertaining learning, which, however, places high demands on development. In developing and evaluating his own game, he concluded that a serious game with the right combination of fun and learning is effective. According to Hoˇrejší [2], it is necessary for graduates of mechanical engineering to be acquainted with the technologies of virtual and augmented reality, and to encounter unconventional methods of education that use game engines. Hoˇrejší, together with his team, created a game for the field of industrial engineering, named DigiTov, using the source engine supplemented with their libraries of models and scripts. They added a production line to an existing game (Half-Life 2), which they created in a software solution for designing and optimizing production layouts—Plavis VisTable® Touch. Subsequently, they created an automatic installer and configurator. The created game was then used as a teaching aid for several years. The advantage of this game was the simplicity of the programing compo- nent, which was suitable for engineering students. The aim of this game was to show the possibility of connecting and using virtual reality technology in the context of production management. To support the DigiTov game, they created two interactive e-learning books and a website. The authors of the presented study had the opportunity to try this game at the University of West Bohemia in Pilsen (Czech Republic). This experience was the initial Electronics 2021, 10, 838 3 of 20

impulse for the idea of creating our own educational game, which is primarily focused on teaching lean management techniques. In his research, Ganebnykh [19] proves the positive effect of educational games on the introduction of lean manufacturing methods in the production process. According to Badurdeen [20], learning needs to give participants the feeling that they are involved in solving a problem. Learning then becomes a natural phe- nomenon, creating commitment and motivation. This means that learning about something to solve problems also means becoming a member of a group that knows and uses this knowledge [21]. Moreover, Badurdeen [20] points out in his study the possible similarities between the simulation and the game. Both provide an experiential learning environment in which the user solves a problem through the use of tools and techniques. In general, the goal of the regular game may not be learning. However, it is a core element for educational games. In his study of simulations and games in lean management, he suggests that partic- ipants should learn to solve problems by experimenting and through their successes and failures. In the conclusion of his study, he identifies shortcomings in existing simulations and games for learning lean management techniques, such as the insufficient focus on soft skills and the focus on linear lean management. A significant shortcoming is also the role of the teacher, who should instead be in the position of a facilitator. When creating educational games, it is necessary to emphasize realism, which is not only the audiovisual part of the game, but also the correct choice of real-life elements and situations. In her study, Putz [8] focused on improving students’ knowledge through gamified workshops. A group of students was taught by the method of gamified workshops while the control group held a workshop without game elements. The result of the study confirmed that gamification has a positive effect on knowledge retention. There was no notable correlation between this effect and the age and sex of the study sample. In times of global pandemic, students’ mental health is increasingly discussed. Research conducted by Comenius University in Bratislava (Slovak Republic) in collaboration with psychologists and psychiatrists has revealed that up to one-third of students experience more severe symptoms of depression. Moreover, one in five university students suffer from increased anxiety [22]. In mid-2020, the university expanded its research in a period of severe anti-pandemic measures. The results showed that up to 72% of students reported that their mental health deteriorated slightly or significantly as a result of the pandemic [23]. The present study was carried out using an educational game in virtual reality, which was created by the authors at their workplace. The present research began before the outbreak of the global pandemic. During the research, universities in the Slovak Republic switched to distance learning from March 2020, with the exception of short time intervals. This fact confirmed the importance of the idea of creating educational games that could help students in distance education. Nonetheless, gamification is not a universal solution and Lee [6] also notes its short- comings, because there is still a danger of game addiction. To benefit the learning process, a game must be carefully designed and generate maximum learning value for the end-user. It should build on existing research and clearly state the achieved goals to the player. Moreover, the teacher is also an important element in the whole process. It is necessary to consider the teacher’s skills and ability to motivate students and provide them with coun- selling [24]. Colás-Bravo [25] notes the importance of personalization and inclusion, which he considers important aspects in the process of teaching planning. He also highlights the importance of teacher’s positive attitudes towards the use of digital tools. A teacher as a manager should know his processes and find possibilities to improve them [26].

Theoretical Basis for Creating a 5S Educational Game in Virtual Reality By implementing lean manufacturing tools in industry, long-term development and sustainability can be achieved [27,28]. The basic lean tools include [29]: Single Minute Exchange of Dies (SMED), Poka-Yoke (Error-Proofing), 5S, Kanban, Continuous Improvement—Kaizen, Just in Time (JIT), Root Cause Analysis, total productive main- Electronics 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 20

Theoretical Basis for Creating a 5S Educational Game in Virtual Reality By implementing lean manufacturing tools in industry, long-term development and sustainability can be achieved [27,28]. The basic lean tools include [29]: Single Minute Ex- change of Dies (SMED), Poka-Yoke (Error-Proofing), 5S, Kanban, Continuous Improve- ment—Kaizen, Just in Time (JIT), Root Cause Analysis, total productive maintenance Electronics(TPM),2021, 10, 838 eight waste elimination, 5 Whys, Takt-Time, key performance indicators (KPI),4 of 20 and Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE). To increase the effectiveness of the educational process applied at universities, it is necessary to introducetenance the (TPM), principles eight waste of lean elimination, manufacturing 5 Whys, Takt-Time, and optimization key performance methods indicators into teaching and (KPI),thus raise and Overall their Equipmentsustainability Effectiveness and competitiveness (OEE). [30]. Manufacturing systems should be designedTo increase effect theively effectiveness [31], and of the the strength educational of processindustrial applied engineer at universities, should it is necessary to introduce the principles of lean manufacturing and optimization methods be the ability to model,into teaching simulate and thusand raiseoptimize their sustainability production and and competitiveness logistics processes [30]. Manufacturing. In ad- dition, a combinationsystems of the should real be and designed virtual effectively world [ 31creates], and the a new strength system of industrial for solving engineer pro- should duction systems [32be– the34]. ability to model, simulate and optimize production and logistics processes. In The 5S methodaddition, is a Japanese a combination method ofthe derived real and from virtual the world “Toyota creates Production a new system System for solving”, production systems [32–34]. which aims to eliminateThe losses 5S method and is waste a Japanese in all method its forms, derived to from ensure the “Toyota a productive Production work System”, environment [35].which The 5S aims method to eliminate can be losses considered and waste one in all of its the forms, most to ensureimportant a productive tools of work lean manufacturingenvironment [36]. It uses [35 ].visual The 5S management method can be and considered standardized one of the techniques most important to im- tools prove and simplifyof material lean manufacturing and information [36]. It uses flows. visual The management designation and standardized5S originated techniques as an to abbreviation of fiveimprove Japanese and simplifywords: materialSeiri, Seiton, and information Seiso, Seiketsu, flows. The and designation Shitsuke 5S (Figure originated 1). as an abbreviation of five Japanese words: Seiri, Seiton, Seiso, Seiketsu, and Shitsuke (Figure1).

Figure 1. The 5S method. Figure 1. The 5S method. Seiri (sort)—in the first step of the methodology it is necessary to sort all items Seiri (sort)—in(material, the first tools) step located of the in methodology the workplace intoit is thenecessary groups of to necessary sort all anditems unnecessary. (ma- terial, tools) locatedThe in needed the workplace items are those into thatthe aregroups used of to performnecessary operations and unneces in the workplacesary. The and needed items are thosecontribute that to are the used added to value perform of the product.operations Those in that the are workplace unnecessary and must contrib- be removed from the workplace. Every item that remains in the workplace is written on the workplace ute to the added valuecard [ 35of– the38]. product. Those that are unnecessary must be removed from the workplace. Every itemSeiton that (set remains in order)—In in the the secondworkplace step of is the written methodology, on the itworkplace is necessary card to find a [35–38]. storage location for each item that was marked as necessary in the previous step, and then Seiton (set in defineorder) how—In many the second of these canstep be of in the the methodology, workplace at the it same is necessary time. The locationto find ofa the storage location foritems each must item ensure that easewas of marked access in as case necessary of need [35 in,39 the,40 ].previous step, and then Seiso (shine)—The third step of the methodology is about maintaining cleanliness define how many inof the the workplacese can be and in itsthe surroundings. workplace Theat the workplace same time. is divided The intolocation individual of the areas. items must ensureFor ease each of area,access itis in determined case of need what [35,39,40]. needs to be cleaned, when it will be cleaned, how Seiso (shine)—often,The toolsthird used, step and of the who methodology is responsible for is theabout task. maintaining Dirt and waste cleanliness can be a source in of the workplace andinefficiency, its surroundings errors, and. The accidents workplace at work. is divided Tools and into equipment individual must beareas kept. inFor good shape and must be ready to be used at any time. Keeping the workplace clean should be a each area, it is determineddaily routine what taking needs at least to 5be min cleaned, [35,40]. when it will be cleaned, how often, tools used, and who isSeiketsu responsible (standardize)—The for the task. fourth Dirt stepand of waste the methodology can be a source involves of the ineffi- standard- ciency, errors, andization accidents of the at first work. three steps.Tools The and standards equipment should must be clear be andkept easy in good to understand. shape In and must be readythis to phase,be used it is at appropriate any time. to Keeping use and apply the workplace elements of visualclean managementshould be a so daily that it is possible to identify abnormalities quickly and effectively [35,39,40]. routine taking at least 5 min [35,40].

Electronics 2021, 10, 838 5 of 20

Shitsuke (sustain)—The fifth step of the methodology is about the integration of the previous steps and the application of the habits to the company culture. This step appears to be the most difficult and requires the resolution of a manager who can use various audits and control cards to achieve this goal [35,39,40]. The 5S method is based on the CANDO system developed by Henry Ford in the early 20th century. At present, other terms are also used, such as 6S or 5S + S (adding safety or security) and 7S (adding spirit and safety) [40,41].

3. Materials and Methods 3.1. Case Study The realized case study was focused on four main research questions: Research question 1: Are educational games an attractive teaching method for univer- sity students? Research question 2: Do educational games bring benefits to the teaching process? If so, what are they? Research question 3: Could educational games help students to better understand the subject? Research question 4: Could educational games increase the students’ ability to learn on their own? The study was realized in two phases. In the first phase, a survey of students’ satisfac- tion with current teaching methods was conducted. A questionnaire was used as a data collection technique, which was created to obtain empirical data. The questionnaire con- tained seven questions about students’ satisfaction with the currently most used teaching methods. The questions were drafted in such a way that they did not require further oral explanation, prioritizing the quality of the information obtained, not its quantity. From the authors’ previous experience, it should be noted that the higher the number of questions in the survey questionnaire, the lower the expected response rate of complete answers from students. The questionnaire was conducted online. In the second phase, the questioned students were offered a 5S educational game in virtual reality as a part of the teaching process. The educational game was created at the Department of Industrial Engineering in Žilina in the game engine Godot. Its aim was to present the 5S methodology in an attractive way for students as one of the tools of lean management. The game was offered to students of the I. degree (Bachelor’s study) during the Production and Assembly Systems lessons and to the students of the II. degree (Master’s study) during the Operations Management and Digital Factory lessons. They continuously used the educational game during the summer semester in small groups. The educational game was created so that the 5S methodology was explained to students via 6 levels, in which level 0 was the introduction. If the player completed all levels with enough points (more detailed description is provided in Section 4.1.7), they did not have to repeat the game. The duration of the gameplay depended on the individual abilities of the students. From the results, the average time required to successfully complete all levels was 17 min (the minimum time achieved was 12 min and the maximum time recorded was 25 min). The tasks they had to solve were based on the content of the 5S methodology steps, which are described in Section 4.1. After completing this educational game, students filled out another questionnaire, in paper form. The main goal was to answer research questions and to confirm or refute the listed statements connected with the use of a virtual reality educational game as part of a teaching process. Subsequently, interviews were conducted with selected respondents, which led to the completion and clarification of selected answers. The addressed sample of respondents consisted of students in their first to third year of Bachelor’s study, the first to second year of engineering study, and the first to third year of doctoral study. A total of 120 students participated in the first phase and 114 students in the second phase. After the second phase of the survey, a supplementary survey was conducted, which was also carried out in the form of an online questionnaire. This supplementary survey was aimed at identifying the advantages and disadvantages Electronics 2021, 10, 838 6 of 20

of the offered educational game and had 102 respondents. The age range was from 19 to 27 years. Data collection took place from January 2020 to March 2021. The design of the study consisted of two basic phases and their evaluation. In phase one, an analysis of student satisfaction with current educational methods was performed. In the second phase, students were offered an educational game focusing on 5S as a teach- ing method. These two phases were subsequently evaluated by an online questionnaire survey. At the beginning of the survey, the authors set four research questions. The ob- jective was to obtain satisfying answers to these questions at the end of the study. The analysis and evaluation of the collected data in both phases took place in the form of quali- tative categorization, tabulation, and creation of graphs and tables. Subsequently, it was supplemented by personal interviews with a small sample of selected respondents. From the conclusions of the questionnaire survey and its evaluation, and from the conclusions of personal interviews with students, it was possible to answer research questions and identify the most significant benefits, and the limitations, of the presented educational game. Methods other than those mentioned above were not used.

3.2. Technical Basis for Creating an Educational Game The educational game was created with the Godot game engine. Godot is a game engine that can also be used in industrial applications. It supports a wide range of platforms, such as Windows, Linux, via OSX, Raspberry PI, or Haiku. The export options for created applications are even wider, ranging from mobile platforms such as iOS and Android, through Windows, macOS, Linux, Haiku, to web platforms such as HTML or Web Assembly. The engine uses the programing language C++, and includes a built-in editor for the Python- like GDScript scripting language and visual programming tools. Its libraries offer interfaces for 2D and 3D graphics, mathematical libraries, physical simulation, network applications, user graphical interfaces, and virtual and augmented reality. It also provides full support for the C# programming language and support for other languages such as Python, Nim, and D. An HTC Vive Pro was used as the display device for the created game.

4. Results The prepared 5S educational game in virtual reality was created and tested at the authors’ workplace—Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Mechanical Engi- neering, University of Žilina in Žilina.

4.1. Educational Game—Workflow The game is divided into five levels because the 5S methodology has five phases. The scenario of the game is shown in Figure2. A more detailed description of the individual levels, including examples from the educational game, is given below. The primary goal of an educational game is learning, although it uses similar principles as regular games. The principles of the 5S methodology, as an element of lean management, were applied to the created game. The main goal of this educational game was to achieve the highest possible score on the scoreboard displayed on the main menu. Each player who successfully completed the game was added to this list with the score and time they achieved. These two values then formed the order on the game scoreboard. The rules of the game for individual levels are described in Sections 4.1.1–4.1.6. The rules of the game are the same for each player so, at the end of the game, players can compare their skills with other players. The scoring system is described in Section 4.1.7. Electronics 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 20

Electronics 2021, 10, 838 for individual levels are described in Sections 4.1.1. to 4.1.6. The rules of the game are7 ofthe 20 same for each player so, at the end of the game, players can compare their skills with other players. The scoring system is described in Section 4.1.7.

Figure 2. TheThe workflow workflow of the educational game for 5S in virtual reality reality..

Electronics 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 20

4.1.1. Level 0—Start The educational game begins with an opening scene in which the player (student) finds Electronics 2021, 10, 838 8 of 20 Electronicsa workplace 2021, 10, x FOR in PEER disorder. REVIEW He enters the game by confirming the enter button (Figure 3). 8 of 20

4.1.1.4.1.1. LevelLevel 0—Start0—Start TheThe educational game game begins begins with with an an opening opening scene scene in which in which the player the player (student) (student) finds findsa workplace a workplace in disorder. in disorder. He enters He enters the game the game by confirming by confirming the enter the enter button button (Figure (Figure 3). 3 ).

Figure 3. Level 0—an entry to the educational game.

4.1.2. Level 1—Seiri (FigureSortFigure) 3.3. LevelLevel 0—an0—an entryentry toto thethe educationaleducational game.game. The player’s task4.1.2.4.1.2. in the LevelLevel first 1—Seiri1— levelSeiri (Sort)( Sortis to) sort the objects in the workplace (Figure 4a). The game uses intuitive TheTheelements, player’splayer’s where task in thethethe firstfirst necessary levellevel isis toto items sortsort thethe are objectsobjects marked inin thethe with workplaceworkplace a green (Figure(Figure 4 4a).a). bubble and unnecessaryTheThe gameitemsgame uses usesare intuitivemarkedintuitive elements, elements,with a red wherewhere bubble. thethe necessarynecessary Unnecessary itemsitems areare items markedmarked must withwith be a a greengreen bubble and unnecessary items are marked with a red bubble. Unnecessary items must moved to the basket (Figurebubble and 4b) unnecessary. For these tasks,items are the marked player with use as red the bubble. controllers Unnecessary of the itemsHTC must be bemoved moved to the to the basket basket (Figure (Figure 4b)4. b).For For these these tasks, tasks, the theplayer player uses uses the controllers the controllers of the of HTC the Vive Pro headset. AfterHTCVive completing VivePro head Pro headset.set. the After task, After completing the completing player the task, themoves task,the player theto the player moves next moves tostep the to withnext the nextstep a but- stepwith with a but- a ton press. buttonton press press..

(a) (b)

Figure 4. Level 1 (a) sorting the objects; (b) putting unnecessary objects to the bin. (a) (b) Figure 4. Level 1Figure (a) sorting 4.4.1.3.Level the Level 1 (aobjects;) sorting2—Seiton ( theb) objects;putting (Set in (Orderb unnecessary) putting) unnecessary objects objects to the to bin the. bin. The player’s task in the second level is to store the items marked as necessary in the 4.1.3. Level 2—Seiton (Set in Order) 4.1.3. Level 2—Seitonprevious (Set in Orderstep. He) must put them in an accessible place so that they are visible and easily accessibleThe player’s when needed task in the(Figure second 5a,b). level After is to completing store the items the markedtask, the as player necessary pushes in thethe The player’s taskpreviousbutton in the to step.second move He to mustlevelthe next put is step.to them store in an the accessible items marked place so thatas necessary they are visible in the and easily previous step. He mustaccessible put them when in needed an accessible (Figure5a,b). place After so completingthat they are the task,visible the and player easily pushes the accessible when neededbutton (Figure to move 5a,b). to the nextAfter step. completing the task, the player pushes the button to move to the next step.

Electronics 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 20

Electronics 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 20

Electronics 2021, 10, x FOR PEERElectronics REVIEW2021 , 10, 838 9 of 20 9 of 20

(a) (b) (a) (b) Figure 5. Level 2 (a) storing objects in the right place; (b) correct arrangement. Figure 5. Level 2 (a) storing(a) objects in the right place; (b) correct arrangement(b) . 4.1.4.Figure Level 5. Level 3— 2Seiso (Figurea) storing (Shine 5. Level objects) 2 (a) storing in the objects right inplace; the right (b) place;correct (b) arrangement correct arrangement.. 4.1.4. Level 3—Seiso (Shine) The player’s task4.1.4. in Level the third 3—Seiso level (Shine) is to define the objects and areas that will be 4.1.4. Level 3—Seiso (Shine) cleanedThe regularly player’s (Figure task inThe 6a the player’s,b). third Objects task level in include the is third to define leveltools is that tothe define objectsare thecleaned objects and at andareas the areas thatend that ofwill will each be be cleaned shift.cleaned TheAreas regularly player include’s (Figure task theregularly table in 6a the, (Figureb).and third Objects floor6a,b). level, Objectswhich include is to includeis define toolsalso toolsswept that the that are objects at are thecleaned cleaned end and atof at areas the eachthe end end thatshift of each ofwill. After each shift. be Areas completingshift.cleaned Areas regularly theinclude task, (Figure the includethe table player 6a the ,andb). table moves Objects floor and ,to floor, which includethe which next is alsotools isstep also swept withthat swept are aat at p the resscleaned endend of ofthe of at each each button.the shift. endshift After of. After each completing completingshift. Areas theinclude task, thethe task, tableplayer the and playermoves floor moves to, which the to next the is next also step step swept with with a at a p press ressthe end ofof the the of button. button.each shift . After completing the task, the player moves to the next step with a press of the button.

(a) (b) (a) (b) Figure 6. Level 3—(a) cleaning the floor (b) example of the correct arrangement. (a) (b) Figure 6. Level 3—Figure(a) cleaning 6. Level 3—( thea )floor cleaning (b) theexample floor (b )of example the correct of the correctarrangement arrangement.. 4.1.5.Figure Level 6. Level 4— 3Seiketsu—(a) cleaning (Standardize the floor ()b ) example of the correct arrangement. 4.1.5. Level 4—Seiketsu (Standardize) 4.1.5. Level 4—Seiketsu (Standardize) The player’s task in Thethe player’sfourth tasklevel in is the to fourth use visual level is management to use visual management elements elementsto imple- to imple- ment4.1.5.The standardsLevel player 4—Seiketsu’ sfor task thement in placement ( theStandardize standards fourth forof level ) theselected placement is to useobjects ofvisual selected (Figure management objects 7a,b). (Figure After elements7a,b). completing After to completing imple- the the task,ment theThestandards player player moves’fors task thetask, into placement thethe player nextfourth movesstep. of level selected to is the to next objectsuse step. visual (Figure management 7a,b). After elements completing to imple- the task,ment the standards player moves for the to placement the next step. of selected objects (Figure 7a,b). After completing the task, the player moves to the next step.

(a) (b) (a) (b) FigureFigure 7. 7.LevelLevel 4 4—(—(a)) elementselements of of visual visual management management for shelves for shelves (b) elements (b) ofelements visual management of visual onmanage- the floor. mentFigure on 7. the Level floor 4—. (a) elements(a) of visual management for shelves (b) elements(b) of visual manage- mentFigure on 7. the Level floor 4—. (a) elements of visual management for shelves (b) elements of visual manage- 4.1.6.ment onLevel the 5floor—Shitsuke. (Sustain) 4.1.6.The Level player 5—Shitsuke’s task in ( Sustainthe fifth) level is to create a control card that integrates all of the previous4.1.6.The Level playersteps 5— andShitsuke’s task thus in creates (theSustain fifth a) never level is-ending to create process a control of improvement card that integrates (Figure all8). of the previousTheThe HTCstepsplayer Vive and’s task thusPro in headset creates the fifth awas neverlevel chosen -isending to ascreate a process display a control ofand improvement cardcontrol that device integrates (Figure for the 8).all virtual of the realitypreviousThe game HTC steps (Figure Vive and Prothus 9). headset creates wasa never chosen-ending as a processdisplay ofand improvement control device (Figure for the 8). virtual realityThe game HTC (Figure Vive Pro 9). headset was chosen as a display and control device for the virtual reality game (Figure 9).

Electronics 2021, 10, 838 10 of 20

4.1.6. Level 5—Shitsuke (Sustain) Electronics 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 20 The player’s task in the fifth level is to create a control card that integrates all of the previous steps and thus creates a never-ending process of improvement (Figure8).

Electronics 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 20

Figure 8. Level 5—the end of theFigure game 8. .Level 5—the end of the game.

The HTC Vive Pro headset was chosen as a display and control device for the virtual Figure 8. Level 5—realitythe end game of the (Figure game9.).

Figure 9. The 5S method educational game played by student.

4.1.7. The Scoring System Figure 9. The 5S method educational game played by student. For each of theseFigure five 9. The levels, 5S method the player educational must game reach played the by minimum student. number of points (min. four points per level). Naturally, each level has a different degree of difficulty, but 4.1.7. The Scoring System for the acquisition of knowledge, it is important to know that all of these steps are equal. Therefore,For each we alsoof these equally five divided levels, the overallplayer mustnumber reach of points the minimum for each level.number If the of playerpoints obtains(min. four a lower points count per level).of points Naturally, than the each minimum, level has he a mustdifferent repeat degree the level.of difficulty, However, but whenfor the he acquisition obtains a scoreof knowledge less than, itor is equal important to the to tota knowl level that score all of (max. these eight steps points are equal. per level)Therefore, and morewe also than equally or equal divided to the the minim overallum number, he can of continuepoints for to each the level. next Ifpart the ofplayer the game.obtains If a playerlower countobtains of the points minimum than the possible minimum, score forhe musteach levelrepeat, he the receives level. 20However, points. Inwhen contrast he obtains, if the aplayer score fulfilsless than each or l evelequal successfully, to the total helevel gets score a total (max. score eight of 40points points. per Theselevel) pointsand more are saved than orto aequal table torating, the minim whichum includes, he can the continue scores of to all the players. next partHowever, of the game. If a player obtains the minimum possible score for each level, he receives 20 points. In contrast, if the player fulfils each level successfully, he gets a total score of 40 points. These points are saved to a table rating, which includes the scores of all players. However,

Electronics 2021, 10, 838 11 of 20

4.1.7. The Scoring System For each of these five levels, the player must reach the minimum number of points (min. four points per level). Naturally, each level has a different degree of difficulty, but for the acquisition of knowledge, it is important to know that all of these steps are equal. Electronics 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 20 Therefore, we also equally divided the overall number of points for each level. If the player obtains a lower count of points than the minimum, he must repeat the level. However, when he obtains a score less than or equal to the total level score (max. eight points per level) and more than or equal to the minimum, he can continue to the next part of the game. if the player does nIfot a like player his obtains score thehe minimumcan repeat possible the game score forbefore each this level, comparison. he receives 20 The points. In last value of the scorecontrast, is still if thein playerthe memory fulfils each of level the successfully,game, and he the gets player a total scorecannot of 40 reach points. a These lower score than thepoints maximal are saved score to afor table his rating, nickname. whichincludes the scores of all players. However, if the player does not like his score he can repeat the game before this comparison. The last value 4.2. Results—Phase Oneof the score is still in the memory of the game, and the player cannot reach a lower score than the maximal score for his nickname. The questionnaire for the first phase was created in electronic form (Google question- naire). Its aim was 4.2.to e Results—Phasevaluate the Oneaddressed students’ satisfaction with current educa- tional methods. The questionnaireThe questionnaire was for anonymous the first phase and was contained created in electronic seven questions. form (Google The question- naire). Its aim was to evaluate the addressed students’ satisfaction with current educational sample addressed consistedmethods. Theof 120 questionnaire students. was The anonymous questions and used contained in the sevenquestionnaire questions. were The sample in multiple-choice foaddressedrm, in which consisted the ofrespondents 120 students. could The questions choose one used or in multiple the questionnaire answers. were in The first two questionsmultiple-choice provided form, basic in information which the respondents about the could respondent choose one orsuch multiple as gender answers. The and the degree of study.first two The questions other three provided questions basic information dealt with about current the respondenteducational such methods as gender and the degree of study. The other three questions dealt with current educational methods at at the university and respondents’ satisfaction with them. The last two questions recorded the university and respondents’ satisfaction with them. The last two questions recorded the the interest in usinginterest different in using teaching different methods teaching during methods lessons. during lessons. The graphical The graphical representa- representation tion of the first phaseof results the first phasecan be results seen can in beFigure seenin 10. Figure 10.

Figure 10. GraphicalFigure 10. Graphical representation representation of students of students’’ satisfaction satisfaction with with current teaching teaching methods. methods.

The question regarding the types of educational methods that students encountered provided the possibility to choose from several options. The graph in Figure 11 shows that up to 76.72% chose e-learning and distance learning (caused by the global pandemic in 2020, when universities in Slovak Republic had to switch to distance learning), which was followed by a lecture and an interview method (73.74%). Only 4.90% of respondents en- countered methods such as educational and didactic games. From the results, it can be surmised that educational games in virtual reality are currently not a frequently used method of teaching.

Electronics 2021, 10, 838 12 of 20

The question regarding the types of educational methods that students encountered provided the possibility to choose from several options. The graph in Figure 11 shows that up to 76.72% chose e-learning and distance learning (caused by the global pandemic in 2020, when universities in Slovak Republic had to switch to distance learning), which Electronics 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 20 was followed by a lecture and an interview method (73.74%). Only 4.90% of respondents Electronics 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW encountered methods such as educational and didactic games. From the results,12 of 20 it can be surmised that educational games in virtual reality are currently not a frequently used method of teaching.

Figure 11. The proportion of currently used teaching methods. Figure 11. The proportionFigure of currently 11. The proportion used teaching of currently methods used teaching. methods. The last part of the questionnaire asked the students about the teaching methods they would welcome at the university.The last part ofAgain, the questionnaire there was asked an option the students to choose about thefrom teaching several methods an- they The last part of the questionnaire asked the students about the teaching methods they swers. The graph inwould Figure welcome 12 shows at the that university. up to 67.25% Again, would there was prefer an option instruction, to choose demon- from several would welcome at theanswers. university. The graph Again, in Figure there 12was shows an option that up to to choose 67.25% wouldfrom several prefer instruction, an- stration, and observation. This was followed by the usage of educational games in virtual swers. The graph indemonstration, Figure 12 shows and observation.that up to This67.25% was followedwould prefer by the usageinstruction, of educational demon- games in reality and didactic games, at 62.50%. stration, and observation.virtual realityThis was and didacticfollowed games, by the at 62.50%. usage of educational games in virtual reality and didactic games, at 62.50%.

Figure 12. Preference ofFigure teaching 12. Preference methods of in teaching further methods education in further. education. Figure 12. Preference of teaching methods in further education. The final question asked about the students’ interest in the integration of virtual re- ality educational games into the teaching process. The majority of students (94.0%) indi- The final question asked about the students’ interest in the integration of virtual re- cated they would welcome the opportunity to use virtual reality educational games as ality educational games into the teaching process. The majority of students (94.0%) indi- part of the lessons, as can be seen in Figure 13. Only 6.0% of respondents indicated they cated they would welcome the opportunity to use virtual reality educational games as would not be interested in such a solution. The most frequently given reasons included part of the lessons, as can be seen in Figure 13. Only 6.0% of respondents indicated they vision problems (e.g., wearing dioptric glasses), nausea when immersed in the virtual would not be interested in such a solution. The most frequently given reasons included world, or simply the dislike of new technologies and the preference for conventional vision problems (e.g., wearing dioptric glasses), nausea when immersed in the virtual teaching methods. world, or simply the dislike of new technologies and the preference for conventional teaching methods.

Electronics 2021, 10, 838 13 of 20

The final question asked about the students’ interest in the integration of virtual reality educational games into the teaching process. The majority of students (94.0%) indicated they would welcome the opportunity to use virtual reality educational games as part of the lessons, as can be seen in Figure 13. Only 6.0% of respondents indicated they would not be Electronics 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEWinterested in such a solution. The most frequently given reasons included vision problems 13 of 20 (e.g., wearing dioptric glasses), nausea when immersed in the virtual world, or simply the dislike of new technologies and the preference for conventional teaching methods.

Figure 13.13.Students’ Students interest’ interest in educationalin educational games games in virtual in virtual reality. reality. 4.3. Results—Phase Two 4.3. Results—Phase Two In the second phase of the case study, students tested the created 5S educational gameIn in the virtual second reality phase during of the selected case study, subjects. students The educational tested the game created created 5S educational in virtual game inreality virtual was reality tested byduring 114 students. selected Aftersubjects. completion, The educational students completedgame created a short in virtual paper reality wasquestionnaire tested by with 114 six students. statements, After with completion, which they couldstuden agreets completed or disagree. a Theshort statements paper question- nairein the questionnairewith six statements were focused, with onwhich different they perspectives could agree of or games disagree. utilization The duringstatements the in the questionnairelesson, i.e., whether were they focused support on creativity different or perspectives increase student of games motivation utilization and are during easy to the les- sonunderstand, i.e., whether and use, they and support whether thecreativity students or are increase interested student in them motivation and thus should and are be easy to part of the education process. understand and use, and whether the students are interested in them and thus should be The results of the questionnaire are shown in Table1. The first number represents the partnumber of the of answers. education The process. second number represents the percentage by dividing the number of studentsThe results that chose of the this questionnaire answer and the are total shown number in of Table respondents. 1. The first number represents the numbAll participatinger of answers. students The (114 second in total) number answered represents a questionnaire, the percentage in paper form, by dividing after the numbercompleting of thestudents educational that chose game. this Up toanswer 71.1% ofand students the total agreed number with theof respondents. first statement “I am interested in educational games at school”, and 21.0% of students agreed completely. The secondTable 1. statement Questionnaire “I would—educational like to use games educational with results games. more often” was positively evaluated by up to 84.2% of students (27.2%—agreed, 57.0%—totally agreed). Only one Indicate for Each Statement How I Totally Disa- student agreed with the thirdI Do statement Not Agree that educational I Do Not Know games haveI noAgree place in school.I Totally In Agree Much You Agree with Itthe: case of thegree statement about whether these games increase the motivation of students, I am interested in educational60.6% of respondents agreed. For the statement about whether these games support the cre- 0/0% 6/5.3% 3/2.6% 81/71.1% 24/21.0% games at school. ativity of students, 83.3% of respondents answered positively. The last statement concerned the ease of use and complexity of educational games; 83.4% of respondents answered I would like to use educational positively, 14.0%9/7.9% did not know, and3/2.6% only 2.6% of respondents6/5.3% answered31/27. negatively.2% 65/57.0% games more often. Educational games have no place 57/50.0% 42/36.9% 14/12.3% 1/0.8% 0/0% in school. Educational games increase stu- 2/1.7% 25/21.9% 18/15.8% 69/60.6% 0/0% dent motivation. Educational games support stu- 3/2.6% 10/8.8% 6/5.3% 86/75.4% 9/7.9% dents’ creativity. Educational games are easy to un- 0/0% 3/2.6% 16/14.0% 59/51.8% 36/31.6% derstand and use.

All participating students (114 in total) answered a questionnaire, in paper form, after completing the educational game. Up to 71.1% of students agreed with the first statement “I am interested in educational games at school”, and 21.0% of students agreed com- pletely. The second statement “I would like to use educational games more often” was positively evaluated by up to 84.2% of students (27.2%—agreed, 57.0%—totally agreed). Only one student agreed with the third statement that educational games have no place

Electronics 2021, 10, 838 14 of 20

Table 1. Questionnaire—educational games with results.

Electronics 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW Indicate for Each Statement I Totally I Do Not I Do Not 14 ofI Totally 20 I Agree How Much You Agree with It: Disagree Agree Know Agree I am interested in educational 0/0% 6/5.3% 3/2.6% 81/71.1% 24/21.0% games at school. I would like to use educational in school. In the case of the statement about whether9/7.9% these 3/2.6% games increase 6/5.3% the 31/27.2% motivation 65/57.0% games more often. of students, 60.6% of respondentsEducational games agreed. have no For the statement about whether these games 57/50.0% 42/36.9% 14/12.3% 1/0.8% 0/0% support the creativity of students,place in school. 83.3% of respondents answered positively. The last Educational games increase statement concerned the ease of use and complexity2/1.7% of 25/21.9%educational 18/15.8% games 69/60.6%; 83.4% of re- 0/0% student motivation. spondents answered positively,Educational games 14.0 support% did not know, and only 2.6% of respondents an- 3/2.6% 10/8.8% 6/5.3% 86/75.4% 9/7.9% swered negatively. students’ creativity. Educational games are easy to 0/0% 3/2.6% 16/14.0% 59/51.8% 36/31.6% Based on these results,understand an additional and use. survey was carried out. This survey contained six questions focused on the content of the 5S educational game and the identification of subjective stimuli for theBased satisfaction on these results, or dissatisfaction an additional survey of students was carried with out. the This game. survey containedThe survey was again conductedsix questions in focused the form on the of contentan online of the questionnaire. 5S educational gameThe andsame the sample identification of of students was addressedsubjective in phase stimuli 2. for O thef the satisfaction 114 invitations or dissatisfaction to complete of students the questionnaire, with the game. The 102 were returned. survey was again conducted in the form of an online questionnaire. The same sample of students was addressed in phase 2. Of the 114 invitations to complete the questionnaire, In the supplementary102 were survey, returned. the first question asked students whether the use of the 5S educational game affectedIn the supplementary their learning. survey, This the question first question was askedclosed, students and students whether the could use of the only choose one answer.5S educational As can game be seen affected in Figure their learning. 14, more This questionthan hal wasf of closed, the students and students an- could swered that the educationalonly choose game one answer.was beneficial, As can be but seen it in was Figure also 14 necessary, more than to half further of the studentsstudy an- swered that the educational game was beneficial, but it was also necessary to further study the issue from the literature. The game itself was enough for a third of the respondents the issue from the literature. The game itself was enough for a third of the respondents without any additionalwithout sources. any additional A share sources. of 4% Aof share respon of 4%dents of respondents said that saidthe thatgame the did game not did not affect their learning.affect There their was learning. no response There was stating no response that the stating game that was the game not beneficial was not beneficial at all. at all.

Figure 14. SubjectiveFigure 14. evaluationSubjective evaluation of the educational of the educational game game impact impact on on students students’’ learning.learning. In the second question, students were asked to make a subjective evaluation of the In the second question,aspects they students consider useful were and asked beneficial. to make Students a subjective had a choice evaluation of four possible of the answers. aspects they consider useful and beneficial. Students had a choice of four possible an- swers. From the results shown in Figure 15, an aspect valued by up to 47% of students was the pressure to solve problems and situations independently. One-third of the ques- tioned respondents chose the intuitive guidance of the player to perform the individual steps of the methodology without prior knowledge of 5S. Participants also appreciated the interesting game environment, but to a relatively low extent. There was no response stating that the game was not useful. In the third question, the survey focused on the players’ satisfaction and comfort with individual levels. Respondents evaluated whether they considered the given levels to be user friendly. Each level was rated separately (Figure 16). Students could answer with “yes” or “no” while providing additional commentary. It should be noted that Level 0 is considered introductory, and does not contain any teaching elements of the 5S methodol- ogy. The results showed that players felt best at Level 1, followed by Level 2, Level 3, and Level 4. Level 5 was evaluated to be the least user friendly. From the obtained data, it is

Electronics 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 20

possible to deduce that with each new level the students felt less comfortable. When eval-

Electronicsuating2021, 10 ,the 838 commentary for the answer “Yes, I consider the level user friendly”, the fol-15 of 20 lowing answers occurred with the highest frequency: the game is logical, the game leads the player to solve tasks without the need for prior knowledge of 5S, the game has an interesting graphicalFrom environment. the results shown When in evaluating Figure 15, an the aspect commentary valued by up for to the 47% answer of students “No, was the I do not consider thepressure level user to solve friendly problems”, the and following situations answers independently. occurred One-third with the of the highest questioned frequency: difficultrespondents control game chose ofthe elements intuitive guidance with provided of the player controllers, to perform the longer individual time steps needed to solve a taskof the in methodologyeach level, lacking without description prior knowledge of the of 5S.level’s Participants goal, and also feelings appreciated of the interesting game environment, but to a relatively low extent. There was no response stating discomfort when usingthat the the game headset was not during useful. longer game sessions.

Figure 15. Subjective evaluationFigure 15. Subjective of aspects evaluation of educational of aspects game of educational. game. In the third question, the survey focused on the players’ satisfaction and comfort with individual levels. Respondents evaluated whether they considered the given levels to be user friendly. Each level was rated separately (Figure 16). Students could answer with “yes” or “no” while providing additional commentary. It should be noted that Level 0 is considered introductory, and does not contain any teaching elements of the 5S methodology. The results showed that players felt best at Level 1, followed by Level 2, Level 3, and Level 4. Level 5 was evaluated to be the least user friendly. From the obtained data, it is possible to deduce that with each new level the students felt less comfortable. When evaluating the commentary for the answer “Yes, I consider the level user friendly”, the following answers occurred with the highest frequency: the game is logical, the game leads the player to solve tasks without the need for prior knowledge of 5S, the game has an interesting graphical environment. When evaluating the commentary for the answer “No, I do not consider the level user friendly”, the following answers occurred with the highest frequency: difficult control game of elements with provided controllers, longer time needed to solve a task in each level, lacking description of the level’s goal, and feelings of discomfort when using the headset during longer game sessions. In the fourth question, the authors of the survey asked respondents what other elements they would recommend including in the game (i.e., what was lacking in the game). Among the most common responses (Figure 17) was the recommendation to modify the game for use on a computer, tablet, or smartphone. Hardware for full immersion in virtual reality is not common equipment for students who would like to use the game for distance education. The second most common recommendation was to add the possibility of inserting additional objects that could be used in Level 2. A share of 15% of respondents

Figure 16. Subjective evaluation of the students’ comfort at individual levels.

Electronics 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 20

possible to deduce that with each new level the students felt less comfortable. When eval- uating the commentary for the answer “Yes, I consider the level user friendly”, the fol- lowing answers occurred with the highest frequency: the game is logical, the game leads the player to solve tasks without the need for prior knowledge of 5S, the game has an interesting graphical environment. When evaluating the commentary for the answer “No, I do not consider the level user friendly”, the following answers occurred with the highest frequency: difficult control game of elements with provided controllers, longer time needed to solve a task in each level, lacking description of the level’s goal, and feelings of discomfort when using the headset during longer game sessions.

Electronics 2021, 10, 838 16 of 20

recommended replacing text instructions with voice and 7% of respondents would welcome Figure 15. Subjectiveexpanding evaluation the of game aspects with of other educational elements game of lean. management.

Electronics 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 20

In the fourth question, the authors of the survey asked respondents what other ele- ments they would recommend including in the game (i.e., what was lacking in the game). Among the most common responses (Figure 17) was the recommendation to modify the game for use on a computer, tablet, or smartphone. Hardware for full immersion in virtual reality is not common equipment for students who would like to use the game for distance education. The second most common recommendation was to add the possibility of in- serting additional objects that could be used in Level 2. A share of 15% of respondents

recommended replacing text instructions with voice and 7% of respondents would wel- Figure 16. Subjective evaluation of the students’ comfort at individual levels. comeFigure expand 16. Subjectiveing the evaluationgame with of other the students elements’ comfort of lean at management.individual levels .

Figure 17. RecommendationsFigure 17. Recommendations for further fordevelopment further development of the educational of the educational game. game.

The fifth question asked respondents to identify the greatest benefits of the game for The fifth question asked respondents to identify the greatest benefits of the game for them. More than half of the respondents indicated that the most valued benefit for them them. More than washalf theof the change respondents of teaching indicated method from that memorizationthe most valued to experiential benefit for form them (Figure 18). was the change ofA teaching share of 24%method of respondents from memorization appreciated to that experiential while solving form the (Figure tasks they 18). were led to A share of 24% ofwork respondents and solve appreciated the problems that independently; while solving 17% ofthe respondents tasks they enjoyed were led the to fun form of work and solve the problems independently; 17% of respondents enjoyed the fun form of the competition among all classmates with an integrated scoreboard; 7% of respondents appreciated the implementation of new technologies into the teaching process because the hardware for full immersion in virtual reality is not a common teaching aid.

Figure 18. Subjective evaluation of the benefits of an educational game for students.

Electronics 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 20

In the fourth question, the authors of the survey asked respondents what other ele- ments they would recommend including in the game (i.e., what was lacking in the game). Among the most common responses (Figure 17) was the recommendation to modify the game for use on a computer, tablet, or smartphone. Hardware for full immersion in virtual reality is not common equipment for students who would like to use the game for distance education. The second most common recommendation was to add the possibility of in- serting additional objects that could be used in Level 2. A share of 15% of respondents recommended replacing text instructions with voice and 7% of respondents would wel- come expanding the game with other elements of lean management.

Figure 17. Recommendations for further development of the educational game.

The fifth question asked respondents to identify the greatest benefits of the game for them. More than half of the respondents indicated that the most valued benefit for them Electronics 2021,was10, 838 the change of teaching method from memorization to experiential form (Figure 18). 17 of 20 A share of 24% of respondents appreciated that while solving the tasks they were led to work and solve the problems independently; 17% of respondents enjoyed the fun form of the competitionthe among competition all classmates among all with classmates an integrated with an scoreboard integrated scoreboard;; 7% of respondents 7% of respondents appreciated the appreciatedimplementation the implementation of new technologies of new technologies into the teaching into the process teaching because process the because the hardware for fullhardware immersion for full in immersionvirtual reality in virtual is not reality a common is not ateaching common aid. teaching aid.

Electronics 2021, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 20

Figure 18.Figure Subjective 18. Subjective evaluation evaluation of the benefits of the benefits of an ofeducational an educational game game for forstudents students.. In the last question, respondents were asked to indicate the disadvantages of the of- fered educational game,In the as lastshown question, in Figure respondents 19. The werebiggest asked disadvantage to indicate thewas disadvantages the need of the for a Virtual Realityoffered (VR educational) headset, which game, is as also shown related in Figure to higher 19. The hardware biggest disadvantage requirements. was the need for a Virtual Reality (VR) headset, which is also related to higher hardware requirements. Players (students) who had to use prescription glasses did not feel comfortable in the game and thereforePlayers up to (students) 12% of respondents who had to chose use prescription as a disadvantage glasses didthat not the feeleducational comfortable in the game and therefore up to 12% of respondents chose as a disadvantage that the educational game in virtual reality is not suitable for everyone. This group felt the most inclined to the game in virtual reality is not suitable for everyone. This group felt the most inclined solution of modifyingto the the solution game of for modifying different theplatforms. game for As different a possible platforms. obstacle As to a the possible im- obstacle plementation of educationalto the implementation games in the of educationalteaching process, games ina small the teaching group of process, respondents a small group of also noted the riskrespondents of disapproval also noted of this the method risk of disapprovalby some groups of this of method the academic by some com- groups of the munity. academic community.

Figure 19. SubjectiveFigure evaluation 19. Subjective of disadvantages evaluation of disadvantages of educational of educational games. games.

5. Conclusions From the case study results, it can be concluded that the use of virtual reality educa- tional games in the academic environment results in additional benefits. The results of the study provided answers to the four main research questions. The first research question was whether educational games in virtual reality are an attractive method of teaching in a university environment. The results of the survey showed that the rate of acceptance of the educational game in virtual reality for the 5S methodology is high. Students embraced the incorporation of virtual reality technology into the process of teaching industrial en- gineering methods. During the research, the authors encountered only a few cases of re- fusal to use a headset for full immersion learning. These were justified by the need to use prescription glasses or nausea when using the teleport function during the game. The sec- ond research question focused on identifying the benefits of using educational games. The results of the questionnaire showed that the students consider the biggest advantages of the educational game to be a non-traditional means of experiential learning and the op- portunity to try out equipment for virtual reality, which they do not encounter normally. The pressure on the player to solve the problem independently while competing with other players also proved to be beneficial and motivating. The third research question focused on whether educational games can help students better understand the subject. The results of the research showed that up to 37% of the respondents did not need addi- tional study of the 5S methodology from the literature after completing the educational game. Therefore, it is possible to state that a properly designed educational game can par- tially replace the classic form of teaching. A share of 7% of respondents even stated that they would welcome the expansion of the existing game with other lean management tools. The fourth research question focused on whether educational games can increase students’ ability to learn on their own. This question was already partially answered in

Electronics 2021, 10, 838 18 of 20

5. Conclusions From the case study results, it can be concluded that the use of virtual reality educa- tional games in the academic environment results in additional benefits. The results of the study provided answers to the four main research questions. The first research question was whether educational games in virtual reality are an attractive method of teaching in a university environment. The results of the survey showed that the rate of acceptance of the educational game in virtual reality for the 5S methodology is high. Students em- braced the incorporation of virtual reality technology into the process of teaching industrial engineering methods. During the research, the authors encountered only a few cases of refusal to use a headset for full immersion learning. These were justified by the need to use prescription glasses or nausea when using the teleport function during the game. The second research question focused on identifying the benefits of using educational games. The results of the questionnaire showed that the students consider the biggest advantages of the educational game to be a non-traditional means of experiential learning and the opportunity to try out equipment for virtual reality, which they do not encounter normally. The pressure on the player to solve the problem independently while competing with other players also proved to be beneficial and motivating. The third research question focused on whether educational games can help students better understand the subject. The results of the research showed that up to 37% of the respondents did not need additional study of the 5S methodology from the literature after completing the educational game. Therefore, it is possible to state that a properly designed educational game can partially replace the classic form of teaching. A share of 7% of respondents even stated that they would welcome the expansion of the existing game with other lean management tools. The fourth research question focused on whether educational games can increase students’ ability to learn on their own. This question was already partially answered in previous answers. With the creation of pressure for independent problem solving and the ability to partially replace the need for additional study, it is possible to assess that a properly designed game promotes independence in learning. In contrast to the classical method of teaching by lecturing or studying literature, educational games in virtual reality can further motivate students to learn. More than half of the respondents stated that the greatest benefit of a 5S educational game is the utilization of experience-based learning instead of memorizing the theory. From the results of the study, the most significant benefit of virtual reality educational games was found to be the change of the classical teaching method to experiential teaching. Using standard memorization, students are often passive. However, in the experiential form of teaching, they are more active and motivated to solve assigned tasks independently and intuitively. Diversity in the teaching process “refreshes” the whole system, makes it more dynamic, and thus can keep students’ attention. Today’s younger generation is mostly experienced with the environment of virtual reality as a form of modern entertainment. Through this, they can feel that the university is keeping up with modern trends. Moreover, it is another way of teaching, which goes beyond the classic method of teaching, and is of interest in its experiential form of application. Among the most significant disadvantages of using this form of training were the high hardware requirements for complete virtual reality immersion and the unsuitability of a headset for players who need prescription glasses. A significant number of respondents recommended modifying the game for use with regular computers, tablets, and smart- phones. Although this would no longer be a complete immersion, this form would be more accessible to the student community. The survey also revealed an interesting fact that, with a higher number of levels, students felt less comfortable. This could affect the future creation of educational games, that could focus on concentrating the teaching material most concisely and reducing the number of tasks to the most necessary. The benefit of this study lies in the identification of the advantages and disadvantages of using educational games in the university environment, which can help researchers and teachers in creating their own educational games in virtual reality. Electronics 2021, 10, 838 19 of 20

Creating an educational game requires the cooperation of experts from several areas. First of all, the scenario of such a game should be created by the teacher of the chosen subject, who selects the area on which the educational game will be focused. This would ensure the game can benefit the development of the student’s skills and abilities. The game should clearly explain the curriculum and motivate the student to solve the problem independently and intuitively. Furthermore, it can be noted that the game in the educational process reflects the fulfilment of tasks in the broadest sense, and indicates the degree and quality of emotional and social enrichment. Through the game, the student acquires the ability of self-reflection, improving his perseverance and initiative. The educational game should find the right balance between the information provided and the need to study from additional sources. If game developers, in collaboration with teachers, can utilize this strong potential, they can increase students’ interest and motivation to study while integrating modern technologies into the teaching process.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, M.K. and G.G. and B.F.; methodology, G.G. and B.F.; software, V.V.; validation, V.V. and B.F. and G.G.; formal analysis, M.K. and M.G.; resources, M.G.; writing—original draft preparation, G.G. and B.F. and M.M. and V.V. and M.G.; writing—review and editing, G.G. and M.M.; visualization, V.V.; project administration, M.G.; funding acquisition, M.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This research was funded by KEGA. Grant number KEGA 017ŽU-4/2019 Design of Structure and Content of the Subject Digitalization in Industrial Engineering for Students of the Field of Technical Focus. Data Availability Statement: The data presented in the case study are available from the correspond- ing author. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References 1. Fifeková, E.; Nemcová, E. Industry 4.0 and Its Implications for EU Industrial Policy. In Forecasting Works (Prognostické Práce); Institute for forecasting, Slovak academy of Science: Bratislava, Slovakia, 2016; Volume 8. 2. Horejší, P.; Polcar, J.; Rohlíková, L. Digital Factory and Virtual Reality: Teaching Virtual Reality Principles with Game Engines. In Virtual Learning; Cvetkovic, D., Ed.; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2016. 3. Gregor, M.; Hercko, J.; Grznar, P. The factory of the future production system research. In Proceedings of the 2015 21st International Conference on Automation and Computing (ICAC), Glasgow, UK, 11–12 September 2015; IEEE: Glasgow, UK, 2015; pp. 1–6. [CrossRef] 4. Gregor, M. The Future Business Will Only Be Digital (Budúci Biznis Bude Len Digitálny). TREND Inovácie Digit. 2015, 47–48. Available online: https://online.fliphtml5.com/buin/yalr/#p=1 (accessed on 9 February 2021). 5. Grabinger, R.S.; Dunlap, J.C. Rich environments for active learning: A definition. Res. Learn. Technol. 2011, 3.[CrossRef] 6. Lee, J.; Hammer, J. Gamification in education: What, how, why bother? Acad. Exch. Q. 2011, 15, 146. 7. Liu, I.-F. The Study of Intention to Learn in Game-Based Learning with a Smartphone. Int. J. Distance Educ. Technol. 2020, 18, 25–41. [CrossRef] 8. Putz, L.-M.; Hofbauer, F.; Treiblmaier, H. Can gamification help to improve education? Findings from a longitudinal study. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2020, 110, 106392. [CrossRef] 9. Laganà, A.; Gervasi, O.; Tasso, S.; Perri, D.; Franciosa, F. The ECTN Virtual Education Community Prosumer Model for Promoting and Assessing Chemical Knowledge. In Computational Science and Its Applications—ICCSA 2018; Gervasi, O., Murgante, B., Misra, S., Stankova, E., Torre, C.M., Rocha, A.M.A.C., Taniar, D., Apduhan, B.O., Tarantino, E., Ryu, Y., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; Volume 10964, pp. 533–548. [CrossRef] 10. Lee, H.; Jung, T.H.; Tom Dieck, M.; Chung, N. Experiencing immersive virtual reality in museums. Inf. Manag. 2020, 57, 103229. [CrossRef] 11. Carbonell-Carrera, C.; Saorin, J.L.; Hess-Medler, S. A Geospatial Thinking Multiyear Study. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4586. [CrossRef] 12. Gervasi, O.; Ranon, R. Guest editors’ foreword to the second issue on virtual reality in scientific application. Virtual Real. 2010, 14, 153. [CrossRef] 13. Gervasi, O.; Magni, R.; Riganelli, M. Mixed Reality for Improving Tele-Rehabilitation Practices. In Computational Science and Its Applications—ICCSA 2015; Gervasi, O., Murgante, B., Misra, S., Gavrilova, M.L., Rocha, A.M.A.C., Torre, C., Taniar, D., Apduhan, B.O., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; Volume 9155, pp. 569–580. [CrossRef] Electronics 2021, 10, 838 20 of 20

14. Pedram, S.; Palmisano, S.; Skarbez, R.; Perez, P.; Farrelly, M. Investigating the process of mine rescuers’ safety training with immersive virtual reality: A structural equation modelling approach. Comput. Educ. 2020, 153, 103891. [CrossRef] 15. Chen, Y.-L.; Hsu, C.-C. Self-regulated mobile game-based English learning in a virtual reality environment. Comput. Educ. 2020, 154, 103910. [CrossRef] 16. Kang, H.; Kim, J. A Study on Design and Case Analysis of Virtual Reality Contents Developer Training based on Industrial Requirements. Electronics 2020, 9, 437. [CrossRef] 17. Kim, J.-Y.; Nam, S. A Study of Immersive Game Contents System Design and Modeling for Virtual Reality Technology. Int. J. Control. Autom. 2014, 7, 411–418. [CrossRef] 18. Yoon, J.; Kim, J. Design and implementation of invention learning curriculum-based serious game contents. New Rev. Hypermedia Multimed. 2019, 25, 205–221. [CrossRef] 19. Ganebnykh, E.; Altsybeeva, I.; Gurova, E. Game based learning of lean manufacturing: Decreasing personnel resistance. SHS Web Conf. 2017, 35, 1029. [CrossRef] 20. Badurdeen, F.; Marksberry, P.; Hall, A.; Gregory, B. Teaching Lean Manufacturing With Simulations and Games: A Survey and Future Directions. Simul. Gaming 2010, 41, 465–486. [CrossRef] 21. Bruner, J. The Process of Education; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1960. 22. Hajduk, M.; Heretik, A.; Vaseckova, B.; Forgacova, L.; Pecenak, J. Prevalence and correlations of depression and anxiety among Slovak college students. BLL 2019, 120, 695–698. [CrossRef][PubMed] 23. Hajdúk, M.; Danˇcík, D.; Januška, J.; Svetský, V.; Straková, A.; Turˇcek,M.; Vašeˇcková, B.; Forgáˇcová, L’.; Heretik, A.; Peˇceˇnák, J. Psychotic experiences in student population during the COVID-19 pandemic. Schizophr. Res. 2020, 222, 520–521. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 24. García-Lázaro, I.; Conde-Jiménez, J.; Colás-Bravo, P. Análisis de las necesidades formativas del tutor universitario de prácticas externas desde la perspectiva del self-study. Rev. Iberoam. Educ. 2020, 82, 121–140. [CrossRef] 25. Colás-Bravo, P.; Rossi, P.G.; De Pablos-Pons, J.; Conde-Jiménez, J.; Moreno, P.V. Aplicaciones digitales para la inclusión. El proyecto europeo DEPIT. Rev. Comun. SEECI 2019, 169–192. [CrossRef] 26. Štefánik, A.; Grznár, P.; Miˇcieta,B. Tools for continual process improvement—Simulation and benchmarking. In Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium of the Danube-Adria-Association-for-Automation-and-Manufacturing, Sarajevo, Bosnia & Herceg, 22–25 October 2003; pp. 443–444. 27. Bhasin, S.; Burcher, P. Lean viewed as a philosophy. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 2006, 17, 56–72. [CrossRef] 28. Mayr, A.; Weigelt, M.; Kühl, A.; Grimm, S.; Erll, A.; Potzel, M.; Franke, J. Lean 4.0—A conceptual conjunction of lean management and Industry 4.0. Procedia CIRP 2018, 72, 622–628. [CrossRef] 29. Logesh, B.; Balaji, M. Experimental Investigations to Deploy Green Manufacturing through Reduction of Waste Using Lean Tools in Electrical Components Manufacturing Company. Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf. Technol. 2020, 8, 365–374. [CrossRef] 30. Kucheryavenko, S.A.; Chistnikova, I.V.; Thorikov, B.A.; Nazarova, A.N. Adaptation of lean production tools to educational activities of universities. Práxis Educ. 2019, 15, 687–705. [CrossRef] 31. Sásik, R.; Haluška, M.; Madaj, R.; Gregor, M.; Grznár, P. Development of the Assembly Set for the Logistic Transport Solution. In The Latest Methods of Construction Design; Dynybyl, V., Berka, O., Petr, K., Lopot, F., Dub, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 81–86. [CrossRef] 32. Buˇcková, M.; Skokan, R.; Fusko, M.; Hodoˇn,R. Designing of logistics systems with using of computer simulation and emulation. Transp. Res. Procedia 2019, 40, 978–985. [CrossRef] 33. Fusko, M.; Rakyta, M.; Dulina, L.; Sulirova, I.; Edl, M. Digitization in the technical service management system. MM Sci. J. 2018, 2018, 2260–2266. [CrossRef] 34. Vavrík, V.; Gregor, M.; Grznár, P.; Mozol, Š.; Schickerle, M.; Durica,ˇ L.; Marschall, M.; Bielik, T. Design of Manufacturing Lines Using the Reconfigurability Principle. Mathematics 2020, 8, 1227. [CrossRef] 35. Veres Harea, C.; Marian, L.; Moica, S.; Al-Akel, K. Case study concerning 5S method impact in an automotive company. Procedia Manuf. 2018, 22, 900–905. [CrossRef] 36. Sharma, K.M.; Lata, S. Effectuation of Lean Tool “5S” on Materials and Work Space Efficiency in a Copper Wire Drawing Micro-Scale Industry in India. Mater. Today Proc. 2018, 5, 4678–4683. [CrossRef] 37. Omogbai, O.; Salonitis, K. The Implementation of 5S Lean Tool Using System Dynamics Approach. Procedia CIRP 2017, 60, 380–385. [CrossRef] 38. Jiménez, M.; Romero, L.; Domínguez, M.; Espinosa, M.D.M. 5S methodology implementation in the laboratories of an industrial engineering university school. Saf. Sci. 2015, 78, 163–172. [CrossRef] 39. Sara Abdalrazig, S.; Abdelmutalab, A. Evaluating the effectiveness of 5S implementation in the industrial sector. Int. J. Innov. Sci. Res. Technol. 2019, 4, 804–808. 40. Lean Six Sigma Definition. Available online: https://www.leansixsigmadefinition.com/ (accessed on 13 August 2020). 41. 5S. Available online: https://www.leansixsigmadefinition.com/glossary/5s (accessed on 3 September 2020).