Understanding the Power of Augmented Reality for Learning
PROCEEDINGS
Gail Carmichael, Robert Biddle, David Mould, Carleton University, Canada
E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Montréal, Quebec, Canada ISBN 978-1-880094-98-3 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA
Abstract
Augmented reality has recently become a popular interface for various learning applications, but it is not always clear that AR is the right choice. We provide a theoretical grounding that explains the underlying value of AR for learning and identify when it is a suitable interface. Our list of operational design advantages includes AR's use of reality, virtual flexibility, invisible interface, and spatial awareness. This list is backed by four underlying cognitive theories: mental models and distributed, situated, and embodied cognition. We argue that the more design advantages a learning system incorporates, the better AR works as an interface. We also identify a set of questions to be used in the design and evaluation of AR projects. With this, we can begin to design AR for learning more purposefully.
Citation
Carmichael, G., Biddle, R. & Mould, D. (2012). Understanding the Power of Augmented Reality for Learning. In T. Bastiaens & G. Marks (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2012--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 1 (pp. 1761-1771). Montréal, Quebec, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 14, 2024 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/41864/.
© 2012 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)
References
View References & Citations Map- Anastassova, M., & Burkhardt, J.-M. (2009). Automotive technicians' training as a community-of-practice: Implications for the design of an augmented reality teaching aid. Applied Ergonomics, 40(4), 713 – 721.
- Anderson, M. (2003). Embodied cognition: A field guide. Artif. Intell., 91-130.
- Azuma, R., Baillot, Y., Behringer, R., Feiner, S., Julier, S., & MacIntyre, B. (2001). Recent advances in augmented reality. Computer Graphics and Applications, IEEE, 21, 34-47.
- Billinghurst, M., & Duenser, A. (2012). Augmented Reality in the Classroom. Computer, 56-63.
- Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning. Educational Researcher, 32-42.
- Clark, A. (1999). An Embodied Cognitive Science? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 345-351.
- Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and Limitations of Immersive Participatory Augmented Reality Simulations for Teaching and Learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 7-22.
- Feiner, S., MacIntyre, B., Höllerer, T., & Webster, A. (1997). A touring machine: Prototyping 3D mobile augmented reality systems for exploring the urban environment. Personal Technologies, 208-217.
- Henderson, S., & Feiner, S. (2009). Evaluating the Benefits of Augmented Reality for Task Localization in Maintenance of an Armored Personnel Carrier Turret. Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR '09), (pp. 135-144).
- Ishii, H., Ratti, C., Piper, B., Wang, Y., Biderman, A., & Ben-Joseph, E. (2004). Bringing Clay and Sand into Digital Design— Continuous Tangible user Interfaces. BT Technology Journal, 287-299.
- Kaufmann, H. (2002). Construct3D: an augmented reality application for mathematics and geometry education. Proceedings of the tenth ACM international conference on Multimedia (pp. 656-657). ACM.
- Klopfer, E. (2008). Augmented Learning: Research and Design of Mobile Educational Games. MIT Press.
- Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press.
- Matsutomo, S., Miyauchi, T., Noguchi, S., & Yamashita, H. (2012). Real-Time Visualization System of Magnetic Field Utilizing Augmented Reality Technology for Education. Magnetics, IEEE Transactions on, 531-534.
- Mine, M., Brooks, F., & Sequin, C. (1997). Moving objects in space: exploiting proprioception in virtual-environment interaction. Proceedings of the 24th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, (pp. 19-26).
- Mountney, P., & Yang, G. (2010). Motion compensated SLAM for image guided surgery. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv., 496-504.
- Norman, D.A. (1991). Cognitive Artifacts. In Designing Interaction: Psychology at the Human-Computer Interface (pp. 17-38). Cambridge University Press.
- Reeves, T., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2002). Authentic activities and online learning. Quality conversations: Research and Development in Higher Education, 562-567.
- Schall, G., Mendez, E., Kruijff, E., Veas, E., Junghanns, S., Reitinger, B., & Schmalstieg, D. (2008). Handheld Augmented Reality for Underground Infrastructure Visualization. Personal and Ubiquitous
- Squire, K., & Jan, M. (2007). Mad City Mystery: Developing Scientific Argumentation Skills with a Placebased Augmented Reality Game on Handheld Computers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 5-29.
- Szalavári, Z., Schmalstieg, D., Fuhrmann, A., & Gervautz, M. (1998). “ Studierstube ” : An environment for collaboration in augmented reality. Virtual Reality, 37-48.
- Tobias Blum, V.K. (2012). Mirracle: An augmented reality magic mirror system for anatomy education. Virtual Reality Conference (pp. 115-116). IEEE.
- Varela, F., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1992). The Embodied Mind. MIT Press.
- Winn, W. (2003). Learning in artificial environments: Embodiment, embeddedness and dynamic adaptation. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 87-114.
- Yuen, S., Yaoyuneyong, G., & Johnson, E. (2011). Augmented reality: An overview and five directions for AR in education. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange, 4(1), 119-14.
These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.
Suggest Corrections to References