## 4 Results
### Pre-Test Analysis of Public Art and Environmental Literacy Issues
The VR group's scores were significantly higher than those of the control group, demonstrating that VR technology has a notable advantage in aiding students' understanding of their work's interaction with the environment. b. The reason is that VR enables students to instantaneously simulate the placement effects of their work within a virtual environment, facilitating a more intuitive understanding of the interaction between their works and the surrounding context, thus enhancing coherence and effectiveness in environmental interaction. In contrast, students in the control group lacked real-time spatial simulation and could only rely on static models or flat drawings for their estimations, which limited their control over the relationship between the environment and their work. C. Spatial Perspective:  
a. The teacher evaluation score for the VR group was 14.6, while the self-assessment score was 13.6; although there is a one-point difference, both maintained a relatively consistent trend. The control group's teacher and student evaluations were completely aligned, both at 11.4, showing that the VR group's scores significantly exceeded those of the control group, indicating that VR technology aids students in better comprehending spatial perspective. b. The rationale is that VR technology offers multi-perspective visual effects, allowing students to observe their initial drafts from various angles and make real-time adjustments to the perspective structure of their work. This advantage enhances students' understanding and representation of spatial structure. In contrast, students in the control group lacked this multi-dimensional visual assistance and could only understand their work through static perspective drawings, which imposed considerable limitations in handling complex spatial structures. (3) Comprehensive Discussion and Explanation  
A. Aesthetic Composition in Public Art:  
a. In terms of form (representational, semi-representational, abstract) and color application, the VR and control groups showed no significant differences, indicating that student performance in these areas primarily depended on individual aesthetic abilities and artistic perception rather than the application of VR technology. b. Form representation emphasizes students' modes of expression in creation; whether through precise representation or abstract creativity, these aspects are not closely related to VR technology. Thus, VR technology did not yield significant assistance in this area. c. Color application presented similar results. The choice and application of color are more influenced by students' perception and aesthetic experience rather than by the VR tools. Whether in a virtual environment or traditional mediums, students' color representation predominantly relies on their internal aesthetic abilities. d. Therefore, we can conclude that the application of VR technology did not result in significant enhancement in aesthetic composition within public art. B. Spatial Representation in Public Art:  
a. The greatest advantage of VR technology is demonstrated in spatial representation in public art, especially in the areas of form, environmental interaction, and spatial perspective, where the VR group's performance significantly surpassed that of the control group. This indicates that VR technology can markedly enhance students' understanding of form design, environmental interaction, and spatial perspective. b. In the form (2D, 3D) project, the VR group clearly outperformed the control group, particularly in the creation of initial drafts of 3D forms in a virtual space. VR technology provides an immersive platform that enables students to make real-time adjustments to their work. In contrast, control group students relied mainly on 2D drawings to complete their 3D forms and were unable to make immediate adjustments due to the lack of virtual technology assistance.