## 3 Methodology
### Evaluation Surveys
#### 3.3.2 Survey Q2: Beliefs About the Virtual Tour  
Participants were asked to rate the following statements on a 5-point Likert scale: strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, and strongly disagree.  
* _\"Regarding the virtual tour you experienced through the ephemeral architectural spaces at the Faculty of Fine Arts, please indicate your level of agreement with the following items:\"_
* Experiencing the ephemeral space in virtual reality was valuable for comprehensively understanding its exterior and interior design.
* Experiencing the ephemeral space in virtual reality allowed for the perception of its visual impact on the Faculty of Fine Arts building.
* Experiencing the interior of the ephemeral space in virtual reality allowed for the perception of its form, colors, and materials.
* The virtual reality experience is a valuable tool for perceiving the interior design of a space.
* The perceptual experience of the ephemeral space in virtual reality was greater compared to the observation based on sketches/drawings.
* The use of virtual reality is a valuable tool in architectural design education.
* The use of virtual reality is an interesting tool for understanding the design of spaces prior to construction.  
Q2_8. I have had previous experiences with virtual reality technology.  
The questions in this survey were systematically selected and formulated according to clear criteria aimed at capturing students' perceptions of VR as a means of exploring space, carrying out an evaluation of design attributes including scale, materiality, textures, colors, and lighting. The questions are structured to measure according to 4 criteria:  
* Criteria 1. Comprehensive Spatial Understanding. The questions Q2_1, Q2_2, and Q2_3 were specifically formulated to determine if VR allows students to grasp both exterior and interior dimensions of designed spaces. These questions aim to ensure that VR effectively conveys spatial relationships, scale, materials, textures, and colors, contributing to a holistic and integrated understanding of design.
* Criteria 2. Perceptual Clarity and Immersion. It was important to understand if VR improves perceptual clarity, especially compared to traditional methods (question Q2_5). The goal is to validate the enhanced sensory and perceptual realism offered by virtual immersion compared to conventional drawings or sketches, thereby supporting students' cognitive engagement with designed environments.
* Criteria 3. Educational and Professional Value. Questions Q2_4, Q2_6, and Q2_7 seek to capture students' perceptions regarding the educational and practical benefits of VR. These questions explore whether students value VR as a beneficial educational tool for architectural and spatial design, capable of enhancing their professional competencies, decision making, and practical understanding before actual construction.
* Criteria 4. Familiarity and Prior Experience with VR. Question Q2_8 aims to understand the baseline familiarity of students with VR technology. This criterion is essential to contextualize responses and determine whether prior experience influences perceptions of VR effectiveness.