VRCHIVE: experiences conducting an online workshop teaching intergenerational participants to create virtual reality films about their lives during the COVID pandemic

ABSTRACT The VRCHIVE workshop was a first-of-its-kind exploratory pilot initiative to examine the feasibility of running a remote, intergenerational Virtual Reality (VR) storytelling workshop through the Toronto Public Library. The workshop took place during the COVID-19 pandemic, which has highlighted a need to develop solutions to address the digital divide and consequent increased social isolation in older adults. The overall program goals were threefold: (1) to create a ‘VRCHIVE’ of 360° VR films that documented participants’ lives during the COVID-19 pandemic, (2) to explore the challenges and successes of the program in order to evaluate its effectiveness, and (3) to understand, broadly, the program’s impact on technology literacy, feelings of isolation, and familial relationship strengthening. Five pairs of grandparents and grandchildren (n = 10) engaged in four, one-hour long online sessions each week in November 2020. Feedback was collected through facilitator observations and weekly debriefing sessions (n = 4), as well as online participant surveys (n = 3) and phone interviews (n = 2) conducted upon program completion. All intergenerational pairs successfully completed a VR film. Post-workshop, participants reported feeling less isolated, more connected with other people, and more confident in learning to use innovative technology. A detailed description of the workshop is provided, along with a discussion on recommendations for future iterations of the program that may serve as a model for other locations that wish to implement similar programming. Overall, participants reported positive experiences, and there is an appetite to sustain and scale the program in the future.


The digital divide and isolation in seniors
The circumstances surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic place individuals of all ages at risk of worsening mental health due to social isolation (Pancani et al., 2020). For older adults in particular, social distancing measures and the rapid switch to virtual services have shed light on the concerning health consequences of low levels of digital literacy (Daly et al., 2021), social isolation, and loneliness (Herron et al., 2021;Wu, 2020). Loneliness in older adults has been shown to have a clear association with depression, anxiety, and frailty, all of which are correlated with loss of independence and overall decline (Chen et al., 2020;Perissinotto et al., 2012). Unfortunately, older adults are on average slower to adopt new technologies (Pew Research Center, 2017), and low digital literacy has prevented many seniors from staying socially connected, albeit remotely, during the pandemic (Wu, 2020). Consequently, the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted a dire need to develop solutions for tackling the digital divide to ensure the long-term mental and physical health of the world's aging population (Daly et al., 2021).

The VRCHIVE project
The VRCHIVE project was a four-week exploratory community-based initiative hosted through the Toronto Public Library. Hosting the VRCHIVE project remotely within the context of the pandemic afforded the opportunity to investigate the benefits and challenges of running a community-based VR storytelling workshop for older adults entirely remotely. The project included a pilot workshop where intergenerational pairs of grandparents and their grandchildren shared their life experiences and learned from one another while learning to use 360° VR cameras to capture personal stories, create meaningful memories and share experiences. The workshop activities were designed to keep intergenerational pairs socially and intellectually stimulated, (Iizuka et al., 2020;Ma et al., 2020), to contribute to digital literacy skills (Ma et al., 2020), foster a sense of community (Sum et al., 2009), improve psychosocial health (Zhong et al., 2020), encourage new methods of self-expression in a supportive environment (Kaimal et al., 2020), and provide equitable access to novel technology (Toronto Public Library, 2019).

The VRCHIVE project objectives
The overarching goals of the VRCHIVE pilot were to determine the feasibility of running a remote workshop through the Toronto Public Library where intergenerational pairs of participants are trained to create VR films. The project team sought to: (1) Document and evaluate the creation of a 'VRCHIVE' of 360° films that portrayed participants' lives during the COVID-19 pandemic.
(2) Identify the successes and challenges of running this workshop as well as improvements for future iterations of the workshop. (3) And broadly, understand the potential benefits of the workshop through identifying its effect on participants' digital literacy skills, feelings of isolation, and relationship-building.

Workshop preparation
The VRCHIVE workshop was facilitated by three members of OpenLab, an innovation center based out of the University Health Network, in Toronto Canada. Logistical support was provided by the Toronto Public Library. The pilot workshop took place online from November 4, 2020 to November 25, 2020. Preparation for the workshop took approximately three months, including adapting the original format (in-person) to a virtual program. Preparation involved (1) creating a detailed agenda that described weekly topics, group activities, homework assignments, and facilitator responsibilities ( Table A1 in the Appendix), (2) creating and sharing a workbook (print and digital) for participants to use throughout the workshop (Figure 1), and (3) ensuring the equipment was functional and ready to be lent from the respective library branches. Ethics approval was received from the Baycrest Research Ethics Board (REB), reference number 19-17. All participants provided informed consent prior to participating in the study. Participants who agreed to share their VR-films provided additional, separate consent.

Participants
A total of ten participants (five intergenerational pairs) were recruited by Toronto Public Library to participate in the workshop through a variety of methods: an online flyer (Figure 2), an Eventbrite listing, promotion by library staff, a post on the Toronto Public Library blog, an advertisement in the library's e-newsletter, a post on their social media, a featured listing on their website, a featured listing in the 'What's On' e-publication, and by word of mouth. Age requirements for intergenerational pairs included having one youth (aged 13-18 years) and their grandparent (no age requirement). All participants were required to have a valid library card with the Toronto Public Library, an e-mail address, access to the internet, and access to a computer with a functional webcam and microphone. Participant demographics and contact information were collected through a self-report Google Forms survey (Appendix B). Participating grandchildren were an average age of 14 (range = 12-16) and 60% (3/ 5) were male. Grandparents were an average age of 72 (range = 66-84) and 60% (3/5) were male. In 60% (3/5) of grandparent-grandchild pairs, neither participant reported having ever seen a VR film before. Participants were also asked to rate their 'level of comfort with technology as a team' on a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 being 'very low' and 5 being 'very high.' Sixty percent (3/5 pairs) rated their level of comfort a 4/5 (i.e., a relatively high level of comfort) and the other 40% (2/5 pairs) rated their level of comfort a 3/5 (i.e., a moderate level of comfort). All participant pairs picked up the equipment on time from their respective local library branches, which spanned various regions of the city (Figure 3).

Resources
Three facilitators planned and ran the workshop and one video editor (a digital media undergraduate student) volunteered to combine participants' media clips and export the final VR films. In addition to the weekly one-hour sessions, facilitators met before and after each session for approximately 30 minutes and 15 minutes, respectively. The VR equipment used throughout this program (i.e., lent to participants) consisted of (1) an Oculus Go VR head-mounted device (HMD), (2) a Yi 360° VR Camera, and (3) a tripod (a range of styles depending on what was readily available at the Toronto Public Library). The Oculus Go was chosen because of its affordability, portability, and comfort. Its stand-alone nature requires no external hardware and reduces simulator sickness because of its low motion latency. The Yi 360° is a small, lightweight VR camera equipped with two 180° lenses to capture 4 K 360° film. This camera automatically stitches the two simultaneously recorded 180° videos into one 360° video without any input from the user. The Toronto Public Library coordinated the distribution of equipment to participants' local library branches for pickup before the first workshop session. Each intergenerational pair received one 'VR-system' containing the VR HMD, camera, and tripod. VR-video and audio files were stored on a Google Drive that all participants and facilitators were permitted to access. Midway through the workshop, a Google Hangouts text-based chat room including all facilitators and participants was created. Final VRCHIVE films were uploaded to YouTube and organized in an unlisted playlist.

Workshop delivery
Participants engaged in 1-hour long Jitsi video-conferencing sessions once per week, from 4:00 pm to 5:00 pm, for four weeks. Each session ended with a relevant homework assignment to be completed by the following session. Throughout the four workshop sessions, participants were taught how to film 360° video, create a storyline reflecting on their lives during the COVID-19 pandemic, upload files to their computer, and watch films on a VR head-mounted device. Table 1 provides a summary of activities by week.
The 'VRCHIVE' VR films had two components: (1) the 360° video recording of a real-life environment, and (2) overlayed audio of the participants speaking or singing. Participants filmed the visuals using the Yi 360° VR camera and recorded audio using a device of their choice, typically a smartphone. Participants had the opportunity to watch the group's final 360° films using YouTube's 360° feature and the Oculus Go VR HMD.
Although the workshop tools (e.g., workbook, activities) were developed before the first workshop session, the team adapted the program as needed based on experiences from the previous session(s). For example, if it appeared that more time was needed by participants to learn to use the equipment, the agenda was updated, and more time was dedicated to this activity than may have previously been planned.

Evaluation tools
A mixed-methods approach was used to evaluate the workshop from both facilitator and participant perspectives. The final VRCHIVE films were informally evaluated by the researchers to provide a rough measure of the workshop's impact on participant learning outcomes and better understand areas where facilitators could improve instruction and the design of workshop materials for future implementations. The films were rated for completion and quality on a three-point scale with 0 being an incomplete film, and 3 being an 'ideal' output in terms of completion, having both grandparent and grandchild present and speaking in the film, and technical quality, (e.g., incorporating points of interest, varied camera angles, sound quality). Ratings were not shared with participants.
Additionally, facilitators recorded detailed observational notes during the sessions and debriefed privately afterward. Unique findings from these debrief sessions were transcribed. Participants were asked to complete an anonymous post-workshop online survey created through SurveyMonkey that employed multiple-choice, 5-point Likert scale, and open-ended questions (Appendix C). Likewise, participants were given the option to take part in a semi-structured phone interview (Appendix D).
Phone interviews were open-ended in nature (e.g., 'What is the most useful idea or skill that you think you'll take away from the workshop') and responses were transcribed. Three researchers independently reviewed and analyzed the interview transcripts, open-ended survey responses, and observation/ debrief notes, using a grounded theory and open coding approach. The three sources of information examined in conjunction to triangulate findings, capture key themes, and systematically construct theory from the data with reference to the research objectives.

Workshop participation
All participant pairs (100%, 5/5) were able to complete a VRCHIVE film, which can be accessed through the VRCHIVE website. All grandchildren (100%, 5/5) attended all workshop sessions. Most grandparents (60%, 3/5) attended all workshop sessions; the remainder attended half of the sessions (20%, 1/5) or no sessions (20%, 1/5) due to unexpected COVID-19-related restrictions. Two participant pairs (40%, 2/5) had to significantly change their filming plans due to increased COVID-19-related social distancing restrictions/lockdowns; one grandchild could no longer visit their grandparent due to increased restrictions introduced mid-way through the program, and another grandchild had to self-isolate mid-way through the program due to exposure to the virus. Despite these challenges, these pairs were still able to successfully create a VRCHIVE film. One grandchild chose to record audio of a phone interview with their grandparent which they later paired with 360° video footage. The other grandchild pivoted their concept to a recorded 360° video of themself isolating in their room with an overlayed audio clip of their self-reflection on COVID-19 isolation and previous conversations with their grandparent. This participant consented to share their VRCHIVE film, which can be viewed here.

Evaluation of the VRCHIVE videos
On a rating scale of 0 to 3 with 0 being 'incomplete,' and 3 being an 'ideal' outcome in terms of a highquality 360° film, all (5/5, 100%) VRCHIVE films scored a 2 out of 3 (i.e., a satisfactory outcome, with some areas for improvement). The final VRCHIVE films were highly unique and personalized, for example, one participant pair decided to tell the story of their life during the pandemic through a rap. Areas where all participants (5/5, 100%) were successful included using at least two camera shots and incorporating some movement to add interest. Two participant pairs (40%, 2/5) included time-lapse effects, and one film (20%, 1/5) included background music. Use of lighting was generally well-done in all films (5/5, 100%), considering some participants filmed both outdoors and indoors. Additionally, all films (5/5, 100%) used only steady, stationary shots (as opposed to shots with first-person movement or shaking of the camera), which is important for reducing the chance of simulator sickness for the viewer. The video archive is tied together using a 'VRCHIVE' workshop logo on the title page of each film.
A few areas for improvement for instruction on filming were noted. In 40% (2/5) of the participant pairs, there was an unresolved technology issue where participants could not export their films in high resolution, and in 60% (3/5) of the films, the focus of the film fell on the stitch line at times, leading to avoidable minor distortions. Additionally, no films (0%, 0/5) consistently had an element of interest situated on both 'sides' of the 360° lens. Especially in HMD, having an element of interest is desirable to increase the chance that the viewer has something to absorb no matter which direction they are facing.
Based on these observations, the group facilitators identified several recommendations to improve the workshop outputs. First, a VRCHIVE filming tip sheet was created based on the issues described above (Figure 4). Other recommendations will be addressed in the future through the creation of additional workbook pages, such as improved equipment instructions, filming tips (e.g., positioning), and a section for participants to describe how they want their film edited. Additionally, to add to the dynamism of the VRCHIVE films, facilitators should consider locating a set of royalty-free music that participants can use as background audio in their films. Lastly, the workshop logo inserted onto the title page of participants' films served nicely to tie together the video archive, and it was recommended that future facilitators should possess the logo to be able to do the same.

Workshop outcomes: workshop format, instruction, equipment, and materials
The VRCHIVE workshop's (1) successes and (2) challenges and improvements for future iterations were evaluated through facilitator observations discussed during debriefing sessions, as well as the post-workshop participant survey and interviews. Two grandparents and one grandchild (30%, n = 3) completed the post-workshop survey. One grandparent and one grandchild (20%, n = 2) volunteered to take part in the semi-structured phone interview. Results of the post-workshop phone interviews largely reflected the survey findings, and areas of improvement suggested by participants were often identified in facilitator debriefs.
A selection of the findings are described below. Table 2 provides a summary of the key themes and suggested areas of improvement as mentioned in each distinct data collection method. Table 3 was synthesized from facilitator post-session debriefing notes and lists a number of unique recommendations for conducting this remote workshop, grouped into changes to consider at the start of the session, during, and toward the end.
(1) Successes. Participants from both generations were observed to engage and ask questions throughout workshop sessions. Notably, a unique synergy was observed within the intergenerational pairs where the grandparent tended to take a leading role with organizing and scheduling the work, while the grandchild led the learning of the technology. Overall, participant feedback from the surveys and interviews indicated that respondents felt supported to complete the project. There was also agreement across respondents and facilitators that five participant pairs (i.e., this group size) worked well for the workshop and that 1-hour long sessions were an appropriate length (100%, 3/3 survey, 2/2 interview). In terms of the remote instructional format, all surveyed participants (100%, 3/3) agreed that the videoconferencing software used (Jitsi) was an appropriate and effective format. Most participants did not experience any significant technical difficulties with any equipment.
(2) Challenges and workshop improvements. All respondents (100%, 3/3 survey, 2/2 interview) recommended that the workshop should have more sessions in total (e.g., five-or six-week program). One interview participant mentioned that a longer time frame might ease the challenge they faced with coordinating time to work on the project with their family member who lives outside the household. Additionally, all participants (100%, 3/3 survey, 2/2 interview) indicated that more time should be dedicated to VR equipment training (e.g., provide video instructions, clarify workbook instructions as the equipment manuals from manufacturers were not found to be helpful, etc.). Likewise, most participants reported that more feedback should be given regarding story development (e.g., e-mail feedback on proposed scripts, one story-telling dedicated session). It was suggested that a short Q&A period be held at the end of each session to ask questions that were not brought up naturally.  • An open, friendly, and relaxed facilitation style -rather than a formal one -encourages participants to open up with the group sooner.

During the session
• Sessions should follow the workbook more to keep facilitators on track and familiarize participants with using it as a reference guide.
• The short independent writing activity was very successful -one participant called it cathartic. The spontaneous writing period during the session yielded more reflective/insightful stories whereas the homework writing yielded more descriptive/analytical stories. Depending on the theme of the workshop, one of these two writing exercises may be favored by facilitators (Depth vs Breadth | Diary vs Laundry List).
• Have participants follow along with demonstrations on their own devices to ensure less engaged participants are paying attention and understand.
• Screen sharing is an effective way to show sample videos during the session. Relate filming tips to the sample films (use 'dos and don'ts').

Post-session
• Send recap/follow-up e-mails after each session to remind participants to charge equipment before sessions (i.e., to be able to practice along with the facilitator) and of any homework assignments. General planning • Ensure a dedicated number of days for video-editing staff or volunteers to create the final product by combining participants' video and audio clips.
• Provide time for participants to review the final product to ensure there are no additional edits to be made.
Some challenges were identified with the remote instructional format by both participants and facilitators. Facilitators reported some difficulty with providing demonstrations of the technology (i.e., pointing to parts of the VR camera over a webcam). Some (20%, 1/5) pairs had technical difficulties with their Yi 360° VR Camera's audio function, which was rectified by the facilitators' suggestion to reset the device parameters. Respondents had mixed (positive/neutral/negative) opinions regarding the: (1) helpfulness of the workbook, (2) ease of use for the 360° camera, and (3), ease of use for the Oculus Go VR HMD. Most participants found the VR camera easier to use than the HMD.
Facilitators identified unique gaps and recommendations regarding equipment for this workshop. For example, it was identified that a form of instant text communication (e.g., Google Hangouts) would be useful to address shared questions and potentially create a stronger sense of community within the cohort. This strategy was successfully implemented mid-way through the workshop. Facilitators also noted digital storage space as an important consideration, and that a large, dedicated storage folder (e.g., Google Drive) was necessary to hold the shared video and audio files. As the number of files will be larger when hosting multiple workshops in the future, the facilitators recommend reminding participants to download and save files they may want to keep. This way, facilitators can clear all 'work-in-progress' files and store only the final VRCHIVE projects in the designated folder.
In terms of equipment loaning, getting the equipment packages ready was a unique experience for the Toronto Public Library. Unfortunately, participants were not able to return the equipment for an extended period due to the library's COVID-19 public health measures. Some reported frustration that they incurred late fees (which were of course removed from their records) and concern about added care and responsibility. Nevertheless, the process ran smoothly after new protocols were designed. As this type of public health measure may continue for some time, facilitators should help to establish clear expectations regarding equipment borrowing and cleaning to ease participant concerns.

Participant outcomes
Survey respondents were satisfied with the VRCHIVE workshop, with all (100%, 3/3) rating their overall satisfaction 4 out of a possible 5, with 5 being the 'most satisfied.' Participants also reported that the workshop tended to make them feel: (1) less isolated (66.7%, 2/3 survey; 50%, 1/2 interview), (2) more connected with other people (66.7%, 2/3 survey; 100%, 2/2 interview), and (3) more confident in learning to use new technology (66.7%, 2/3 survey; 100%, 2/2 interview). No participants (0%, 0/5) reported negative impacts of the workshop on their feelings of isolation, connectedness to other people, or confidence in learning technology. In terms of forming connections with others outside their family, interviewed participants reported that it was more difficult to connect with others online rather than in person, although they were 'still able to know everyone somewhat.' Still, many expressed a desire to stay connected with each other, and the grandchildren in the group were observed to interact socially with each other during the sessions. When asked about the workshop's impact on their feelings of loneliness during COVID-19, the interviewed grandchild agreed that the workshop had had an impact, while the interviewed grandparent did not, reporting that loneliness had not been much of an issue for them.

Learning new technology
Overall, survey respondents found the VRCHIVE workshop more challenging (66.7%, 2/3) and fun (66.7%, 2/3) compared to other publicly run workshops (e.g., through the Toronto Public Library or a community centre/YMCA). When asked about access to novel equipment like the VR HMDs, most respondents agreed that they would not have had the opportunity to use VR equipment if it were not for this workshop. Additionally, one grandparent reported that they were excited to create more VR films.
All interviewed participants both reported an increased level of comfort with the technology, as well as surprise at the ease of use of the VR equipment. For example, one grandparent stated, 'Well, I don't know technology [. . .]

VRCHIVE project strengths
The global VR industry is predicted to more than double size from 2021 to 2024 (Alsop, 2021) and yet the typical VR consumer is still young, male, and uses the technology for gaming (Stevanovic, 2019). A unique strength of VRCHIVE was its ability to provide free access to cutting-edge technologies that allowed intergenerational pairs with no previous experience to create 360° films in a short period of time. The successful completion of all five VRCHIVE films, in addition to the experiences of the facilitators and feedback from participants, affirm that it is possible to run a remote workshop where intergenerational pairs of participants are taught to create VR films. Overall, participants were quite satisfied with the workshop. This pilot program demonstrated success in making participants feel more confident in learning to use new technology and more connected with other people, as well as less isolated for those experiencing loneliness due to the COVID-19. Both facilitators and participants confirmed enjoying the workshop sessions.
The authors were able to provide a detailed account of the program's structure to serve as a model should other localities wish to implement similar programming, as well as identify solutions for several challenges and gaps related to teaching intergenerational pairs in a virtual environment. As this was the pilot iteration of the program, many initial program shortcomings can now be easily rectified, for instance, the lack of previous examples to share with participants. The most significant changes that will be implemented in future iterations of the workshop will be: (1) extending the workshop's length by one week, (2) dedicating more time to training participants how to use the technology, and (3) designing more effective instructions to complement the in-session training (e.g., provide step-by-step video instructions participants can watch later, a filming tip sheet). Many other recommendations were iteratively implemented during this November 2020 workshop, such as weekly e-mail 'wrap-ups' that reminded participants about what they learned, addressed questions that were raised, and provided reminders about homework due the following week.
The program also allowed strangers to share their pandemic experiences and helped participant pairs to learn more about each other and find commonalities among both younger and older generations (e.g., reflecting on similarities between the Polio epidemic and COVID-19 pandemic). Overall, the program was successful in meeting its objectives to increase virtual social opportunities, and in cultivating older adults' ability to fully participate in modern society (Hughes et al., 2017;Martinez-Alcala et al., 2018).

Challenges and limitations
Conducting the VRCHIVE workshop remotely during the context of COVID-19 instead of in the library was both a challenge and an opportunity. First, providing instructional training for equipment remotely was difficult when demonstrating actions (e.g., pushing a small button on the VR HMD) through a webcam with poor resolution. Although dedicating more time to training participants on the technology and creating the step-by-step video instructions described above could help to mitigate this issue, the facilitators felt that a hybrid program format would be ideal once social distancing measures are lifted. Delivering the program virtually with an in-person component for hands-on equipment training or a drop-in 'office hour' at the library could be the optimal way to offer the convenience of participating from home as well as adequate support for learning the technology.
Second, the interaction between participants became 'impossible' in two cases due to one grandchild needing to self-isolate due to exposure to the virus and the 'stay at home order' put in place halfway through the workshop. These two participants devised creative solutions to complete their films, though in the case of the grandchild who had to self-isolate, his grandmother was not able to be part of the film. Unfortunately, the grandparents did not attend the workshop sessions once they could no longer see their grandchild in person, and the reason why the grandparents did not attend is unknown to the authors. All participants were asked to confirm that they had access to a device and a connection to the internet before the start of the program. It is possible that the grandparents were not comfortable accessing the online workshop without assistance, or that they were relying on using their grandchild's device for video conferencing sessions.
A key takeaway is that workshop facilitators should consider planning for proactive skills assessment, support, and follow-up for participants needing assistance with accessing either the video conferencing platform or a device capable of video conferencing. Martínez-Alcalá et al. (2021) found higher drop-out rates for seniors attending remote digital skills workshops during the pandemic compared to hybrid (online and in-person) workshops and that spending time to assess participants' technical skills is a strategy that may help to improve participation. Further, in regions where COVID-19 remains a threat and social distancing restrictions are in place, VRCHIVE participant pairs should be a part of the same household since the filming task requires participant pairs to meet each other in person.
The small sample size, low response rate, and use of anonymous questionnaires in this pilot project are important limitations to consider, particularly as they pertain to understanding the workshop's impact on participants' feelings of isolation and connectedness. It is unknown which participant pairs are represented in the survey results, and it also is not possible to draw conclusions from this small sample on any systematic differences between the grandparents and grandchildren in terms of their learning experience or the impact of the workshop. The low response rate did not come unexpected, as eliciting feedback in this sort of workshop can be a challenge in general. Nonetheless, informal facilitator observations of participant engagement with the workshop were in line with participant responses regarding their satisfaction with the workshop, demonstrating that the workshop demonstrated feasibility. Lastly, the study was not designed in a way to determine whether VRCHIVE's use of immersive storytelling holds an advantage over non-immersive digital storytelling activities or other similar existing library programming.

Future directions
The next steps for this program would be to run more workshops and implement recommendations where possible. For example, resources should be improved by adding informational pages to the workbook and digitizing them for online accessibility. For the program to be sustainable and scalable to a greater number of participants, the current OpenLab facilitators would need to train Toronto Public Library staff to conduct the workshop independently. Running the program would likely require two roles: (1) one staff member to manage the technology distribution and training, and (2) another to guide storytelling efforts. Alternatively, where public health guidance permits, this workshop could be conducted as an in-person or hybrid program at select library branches, with multiple workshops taking place each year. In-person components of the program could ease the facilitation of interpersonal connections and, notably, offer hands-on equipment training. Another programming possibility that could be worth exploring for its potential to enhance interpersonal connections would be for the Toronto Public Library to form a VR 'club' where people of all ages would routinely meet to learn and discuss 360° filmmaking.
Data collected through post-workshop questionnaires and interviews from future implementations of the workshop will serve to provide a more detailed account of the program's impact, strengths, and areas for improvement. Participant outcomes such as relationship strengthening, social connectedness, and technology literacy, and differences in workshop outcomes between generations, could be systematically measured through pre-and post-program testing using standardized measures. For example, the System Usability Scale (Brooke, 1996) is a widely used and versatile 10-item tool that could be implemented to better understand VRCHIVE's impact on participant comfort with technology or serve as a benchmark to measure the impact of any changes in equipment or teaching strategy.
Beyond the COVID-19 pandemic, the VRCHIVE workshop could be a valuable tool in sharing perspectives and giving a voice to seniors in underrepresented communities who face barriers accessing such technology, an idea echoed by one interview respondent. Future VRCHIVE workshops may take on specific themes, such as Indigenous perspectives on living in Toronto, first and secondgeneration immigrant family experiences, or the realities of caring for a loved one with dementia. These topics will serve to shed light on voices or experiences that have been historically underrepresented in our cultural narratives.

Conclusion
The VRCHIVE workshop was the first-of-its-kind at attempting to co-create VR experiences with intergenerational pairs of participants, reflecting on their lives during the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, the program can be seen as a success, holding great potential to increase digital participation and psychosocial outcomes for seniors. This workshop allowed participants to strengthen existing bonds with their families while making new connections in the broader community without compromising their safety in relation to COVID-19. Due to the success of the first workshop, the team plans to build a packaged program that can be hosted online by Toronto Public Library for future implementations. The VR memory-capsule films created during the workshop are viewable on the program website and will serve as a living, growing, cultural artifact of Toronto experiences. Each participant in each pair: write your own story (around 500 words) We will be sharing with each other next week! But only to reflect positive aspects that we liked best -this is not a critique, and we are not being marked. Just have fun ☺ Film something in a different setting (e.g., outside) and upload to drive by Monday. Let's go around to each group and have each person read their story. For the rest of the group, as each person reads their story, practice active listening and make notes of the part we like best in our workbooks. We are here to listen and reflect back positive encouragement. This is NOT a critique. Each group has about 5 minutes to share.

(Continued)
-What parts could you see in your head and what did it make you think about? -Did an image come to mind? -Which parts were funny, emotional., heartwarming, sad, exciting, etc.? Visual Setting Discussion: Brainstorm visuals that we think might go with your story in our workbooks. Is there a main part of your story that has a location associated with it? Can you film there? If not, is there another setting that might be fun? It does not necessarily need to match or be literal. Also -do you want different settings for each of your stories (e.g., Grandmother looking out the window, grandson outside, etc.) By the end of the brainstorm -participants should have an idea of what they are going to film.

30
Homework: Film your videos and audio record your stories. Upload to the drive by Monday.