Lesson Plan: VR Ethics and the Rise and Fall of Workrooms

Hook: Turn a headline into a classroom that solves real problems

Students and instructors tell us the same thing: they want classroom materials that connect current tech headlines to clear frameworks, guided debate, and tangible takeaways. When Meta announced in early 2026 that it would discontinue the standalone Workrooms app and restructure Reality Labs, educators gained a live, high-stakes case study to teach VR ethics, investment decision-making, and technology policy. Use this lesson plan to turn that news—layoffs, billions in losses, and a platform pivot—into an interactive module that teaches students how to evaluate ethical investment, identify sunk cost traps, and draft policy recommendations for responsible tech pivots.

Why teach VR ethics through the Meta Workrooms case?

By 2026, the tech ecosystem has shifted: companies are balancing AI-driven wearables, evolving AR/VR platforms, increased regulatory scrutiny, and pressure from investors for near-term returns. Meta’s February 2026 decision to discontinue Workrooms as a standalone app—while shifting investment toward wearables and AI-enabled glasses and consolidating Horizon capabilities—makes an ideal case study because it spans corporate strategy, ethics, and public policy. The case is recent, well-documented, and rich with stakeholder implications: employees, users, investors, regulators, and partner organizations.

Quick context: What happened (late 2025–early 2026)

Use this short factual summary at the start of class so everyone shares the same baseline facts.

• Workrooms discontinuation: Meta announced it would kill the standalone Workrooms app effective February 16, 2026, integrating similar functionality into the broader Horizon ecosystem.
• Reality Labs losses and cuts: Reality Labs reportedly lost more than $70 billion since 2021. In late 2025 and early 2026 Meta slashed metaverse spending, closed several VR studios, and initiated layoffs of over 1,000 Reality Labs employees.
• Strategic pivot: The company signaled a shift toward wearables and AI-enabled glasses while wrapping up Horizon managed services.
• Policy backdrop: 2024–2026 saw increased regulatory scrutiny of large tech platforms, including emerging frameworks for AI oversight and platform accountability in multiple jurisdictions.

Learning objectives

• Explain the sunk cost fallacy and apply it to corporate R&D decisions.
• Analyze ethical trade-offs when tech firms pivot products or discontinue platforms.
• Draft policy recommendations that balance innovation, worker protections, and user rights.
• Conduct stakeholder mapping and cost–benefit analysis under uncertainty.
• Practice public-facing communication: write a short op-ed or company memo about a product shutdown.

Assigned readings (core + optional)

Assign 3–5 core readings and 2–4 optional deeper dives. Each reading has a short prompt for students.

1. Core
   • Meta’s announcement on discontinuing Workrooms (Feb 2026) — prompt: identify the company’s stated reasons and the language used about users and productivity.
   • News synthesis of Reality Labs losses and 2025 restructuring (late 2025–early 2026 coverage) — prompt: summarize financial drivers and observable strategic redirection.
   • Arkes & Blumer (1985), “The psychology of sunk costs” — prompt: write one paragraph connecting the sunk cost bias to corporate R&D decisions.
2. Optional / deeper dives
   • A 2023–2025 review of regulation and platform accountability (select excerpts) — prompt: which policy levers are relevant to platform pivots?
   • Short case on hardware environmental impacts and device lifecycles and supply chain risks — prompt: include lifecycle costs in your ethical analysis.

Week-by-week module outline (4 sessions, adaptable)

Session 1 — Frame the problem (90 minutes)

• 10 min: Hook—present the Feb 16, 2026 Workrooms discontinuation headline and play a 2-min clip or show the company statement.
• 15 min: Mini-lecture—explain sunk costs, platform lock-in, and corporate pivots with short examples.
• 25 min: Small groups—stakeholder mapping (users, employees, investors, partners, regulators, environment). Each group lists potential harms and benefits.
• 40 min: Share out + synthesis—use a class board (physical or digital) to consolidate maps and identify data gaps to research before Session 2.

Session 2 — Evidence and role-play (90 minutes)

• 15 min: Quick student presentations on assigned readings (3–4 groups).
• 50 min: Role-play simulation—divide class into Executive Board, Worker Representatives, Investor Advocates, and Policy Regulators. Provide a brief: decide whether to continue Workrooms, integrate into Horizon faster, or pivot to wearables. Each side has 10 minutes to prepare and 5–7 minutes to present.
• 25 min: Debrief—focus on ethical considerations, data gaps, and how the sunk cost fallacy influenced proposals.

Session 3 — Policy brief workshop (90 minutes)

• 10 min: Explain deliverable: a 700–1,000 word policy brief (or company memo) that recommends a responsible shutdown/pivot plan that addresses employees, users, and environmental impacts.
• 60 min: Drafting—students work in pairs using a provided template (executive summary, evidence, recommendations, implementation timeline, metrics).
• 20 min: Peer review—swap and give feedback focused on evidence and stakeholder protections.

Session 4 — Presentations & assessment (60–90 minutes)

• Students present briefs (5–7 minutes each) followed by 3–5 minute Q&A.
• Instructor sums up key learnings and hands out rubric-based feedback.

Sample assignments & deliverables

• Policy brief (graded): 700–1,000 words with citations, stakeholder plan, timeline, and 3 concrete metrics to measure success.
• Stakeholder memo (formative): single-page map with prioritized risks and mitigations.
• Reflection essay: 400–600 words connecting sunk cost theory to the case outcome (pass/fail or low-stakes grade).
• Optional group project: design a community transition plan for organizations using Workrooms to move to Horizon or alternative tools (includes communication templates and data portability checklist).

Classroom discussion questions (use for in-class and forums)

• What are the ethical obligations of a company when it discontinues a platform used by organizations (e.g., schools, health providers)?
• How does the sunk cost fallacy show up at the corporate level, and how can boards prevent it?
• Who bears responsibility for data continuity and user migration when a platform shuts down?
• How should companies balance long-term R&D investment in emerging tech with short-term shareholder expectations?
• What policy levers (regulatory or market-based) could protect workers affected by sudden pivots? Consider platform accountability and local governance options.

Case study analysis: Sunk costs, strategic pivot, and ethics

Students should apply at least three frames when analyzing Meta’s decision: financial (losses exceeding $70B), organizational (layoffs, studio closures), and societal (user impacts, device lifecycles, and privacy). Ask students to quantify—not necessarily with exact numbers but with plausible ranges—opportunity costs: what could the $70B have funded if allocated differently? This pushes them to think beyond headlines and into trade-offs.

Use the following prompts to guide written analysis:

• Identify the primary driver(s) of the shutdown: Was it an unavoidable market signal, poor product-market fit, regulatory pressure, or executive strategy change?
• Outline two alternative strategies Meta could have pursued and evaluate the ethical trade-offs of each (e.g., prolonged R&D vs. orderly sunsetting with worker protections).
• Assess the role of investor expectations and governance structures in influencing the pivot.

Assessment rubric (sample)

• Evidence & accuracy (30%): Uses assigned readings and external reputable sources; factual accuracy about the case.
• Ethical reasoning (25%): Recognizes multiple stakeholders, weighs trade-offs, applies ethical frameworks (utilitarian, deontological, rights-based).
• Practicality & creativity (20%): Offers feasible recommendations with concrete steps and metrics.
• Communication (15%): Clarity, structure, and suitability for intended audience (e.g., board memo vs. op-ed).
• Collaboration & peer feedback (10%): Engagement in group work and quality of feedback given.

Practical teaching tips & tools

• Use a shared digital whiteboard (Miro, Jamboard) for stakeholder mapping so remote and in-person students can collaborate synchronously.
• Provide a one-page factsheet summarizing the timeline (late 2025–Feb 2026) and key numbers to prevent debates from devolving into speculation.
• Encourage public-facing deliverables (op-eds, blog posts) to teach persuasive writing under evidence constraints.
• When discussions get heated, reframe to “what data would change your view?”—this models evidence-driven argumentation.
• Invite a guest speaker if possible: a former product manager, labor organizer, or policy analyst to provide real-world perspective.

2026 trends and why this module matters now

As of 2026, the tech landscape emphasizes rapid AI integration, pragmatic spending on hardware, and intensified regulatory attention. Companies are increasingly trading long-run platform bets for AI-enabled wearables and services that promise nearer-term revenue. That pivot is why the Workrooms story is timely: it encapsulates a broader industry shift from speculative metaverse investments to product lines with clearer monetization paths (e.g., smart glasses) and highlights the human costs when large firms retrench quickly.

Teaching this module helps students learn how to hold institutions accountable while recognizing real operational constraints. It also prepares them for careers that will require cross-disciplinary fluency: technical literacy, policy savvy, and ethical judgment.

Extensions and further reading (for students who want to go deeper)

• Academic: Arkes & Blumer (1985), “The psychology of sunk costs” — foundational read on sunk cost bias.
• Industry reports (2024–2026) on AR/VR investment trends and hardware lifecycles — useful for lifecycle/environmental arguments.
• Recent policy briefs on platform responsibility and worker protections (2024–2025) — locate jurisdiction-specific documents (EU, US state laws).
• Journalism: investigative pieces tracking Reality Labs’ losses and internal strategy memos—use these to practice source triangulation.

Adapting the module: High school, undergraduate, and graduate levels

High school: Simplify concepts—focus on stakeholder mapping, an introductory explanation of sunk cost, and a brief op-ed assignment.

Undergraduate: Use the full 4-session model with a graded policy brief and the role-play simulation.

Graduate / professional: Add quantitative exercises (cost modeling, basic Monte Carlo scenarios), and ask students to produce a formal board presentation with annexed legal and regulatory analysis.

Common pitfalls and how to avoid them

• Pitfall: Class devolves into company bashing or speculation. Fix: Insist on evidence—use the factsheet and require citations.
• Pitfall: Students ignore employee impacts. Fix: Assign a worker-representative role in the simulation and require mitigation measures in briefs.
• Pitfall: Over-focus on product features instead of governance. Fix: Tie every recommendation back to accountability, transparency, or metric-based evaluation.

"Meta made the decision to discontinue Workrooms as a standalone app," — company statement (Feb 2026). Use this sentence as a prompt: who benefits from that framing and who is sidelined?

Actionable takeaways for instructors

• Start with a one-page factsheet and two short readings to align student knowledge quickly.
• Use role-play to surface ethical tensions—give each group a clear objective and constraints.
• Require public-facing deliverables to develop persuasive, accountable communication skills.
• Assess with a rubric that balances evidence, ethics, and practical feasibility.
• Update the module annually to reflect new platform decisions and regulatory changes—this is a live case.

Call to action

Ready to teach this module? Download our complete lesson kit with slide decks, a printable factsheet, role-play cards, and grading rubrics—prepared for 2026 classroom realities and aligned to technology policy trends. Join thebooks.club educator community to get the free kit, share classroom notes, and access guest speaker slots to bring this case to life for your students.

Related Reading

• Consolidating martech and enterprise tools: An IT playbook for retiring redundant platforms
• Future Predictions: How 5G, XR, and Low-Latency Networking Will Speed the Urban Experience by 2030
• Beyond Filing: The 2026 Playbook for Collaborative File Tagging, Edge Indexing, and Privacy‑First Sharing
• Profile: The Teams Building Bluesky — Founders, Product Leads, and the Road to Differentiation
• How Marketplace AI Will Change Buying Bike Gear: What to Expect from Google & Etsy Integrations
• Streamers Beware: Account Takeover Tactics and How Soccer Gamers Can Protect Their Profiles
• Mini‑Me for Two: Matching Jewelry Collections for You and Your Dog
• How to Verify Breaking Social Media Stories: A Reporter’s Checklist After the X Deepfake Scare