You are on page 1of 17

Running head: WEBLIOGRAPHY-AUGMENTED REALITY

Webliography: Augmented reality and its applications


Kelly Sparks
Liberty University

WEBLIOGRAPHY-AUGMENTED REALITY

Augmented reality and its applications


The webibliography provided here covers various aspects of augmented reality
technologies. Augmented reality allows for the combination of virtual and physical spaces in a
relatively seamless manner which augments the world around individuals (Mullen, 2011). Vision
based and location-based technologies enable users to augment the world using both PCs and
mobile devices. Specific articles and resources were chosen to evaluate the application of the
technology. The focus was on educational applications mostly within the science content area.
Age ranges from early elementary to college level scenarios were used.

Bressler, D.M. & Bodzin, A.M. (2013). A mixed methods assessment of students flow
experience during a mobile augmented reality science game. Journal of Computer
Assisted Learning, 29(6), 505-517. doi: 10.1111/jal.12008

Flow theory describes how people that are engaged in activities that are meaningful are
more likely to stay focused. Bressler and Bodzin (2013) investigated a science gaming
experience in relation to flow experience. A mixed method study with convergent design
was conducted using a mobile augmented reality (AR) game with an ARIS platform.
Quick Response (QR) codes were used to engage players. The ARIS platform was
chosen over location-based AR technology to decrease distraction and frustration in
players. The game was designed to be a narrative-driven, inquiry based mobile AR game
to assess flow experience both quantitatively and qualitatively. The variables identified
and measured were interest in science, gaming attitude, and gender. Two questions

WEBLIOGRAPHY-AUGMENTED REALITY

investigated were; what features of flow emerged and what relationship did interest,
attitude, and gender have on flow experiences. Within the game, students each had
individual roles that required them to work collaboratively to find a known final result.

A middle school located in an urban Pennsylvania city was used for the study. Sixtyeight students ranged in ages from eleven to fifteen and were in grades 6 through 7, with
the highest percentage being in 8th grade. Students from two science teachers classes and
one after school program were put into seventeen mostly mixed gender groups with the
exception of two all girl groups and one all boy group. The study was conducted over
two weeks in March 2012. Data was collected using pre and post surveys using Survey
Monkey, field observations, and group interviews. Likert-style questions were used for
research based survey questions, and Cronbachs alpha statistic was used to measure
internal consistency. Field observations were done by a researcher following students as
they participated in the game making note of focus on task, physical movement,
technology use, and collaboration. Group interviews were conducted after the postsurvey to follow up on specific post-survey answer questions. Variance in flow
experience predicted by the three variables was analysed using multiple hierarchal
regression analysis. ATLAS.TI, a qualitative software, was used to analyze transcripts
and a constant-comparative method was used to review. Dependability of the results was
confirmed using member checks and debriefing sessions.

An analysis of variance (ANOVA) test showed that there was no significant difference in
flow experiences based on the roles of the students in the game, and that non-integral and

WEBLIOGRAPHY-AUGMENTED REALITY

internal roles were just as effective. Results showed that average players had flow-like
experience with half of the players experiencing some level of flow. Total concentration,
a balance of challenge and skill, and intrinsic reward were flow elements that were
encountered most. Gender and interest in science were not significant in predicting flow,
but gaming attitude was a strong predictor. Overall, the game was a positive experience
that was different from the classroom experience and something students were interested
in pursuing in the future.

In addition to contributing to the understanding of flow

experience while using vision-based mobile AR games, research presented by Bressler


and Bodzin (2013) supports exploring research into the positive effect games can play in
learning and increased interest in science for both genders.

In terms of extensive research, the use of mobile AR technology lacks. Bressler and
Bodzin (2013) begin to shed light on appropriate applications of the technology in the
classroom. It is important to note that the researchers made allowances to decrease
cognitive load on the students by choosing to not use the location-based AR technology
that can often be frustrating or unreliable. They also chose a free, open-source resource
to create the game making it easily accessible to anyone. The game itself was userfriendly from both a student and teacher standpoint. A social constructivist approach and
a jigsaw method were important design features. Additional considerations were made to
ensure that the game itself was a collaborative one that engaged all students at various
times to support a truly social interaction. The researchers noted in one case that students
admitted that they did not like one another but appeared to still work together effectively
to complete the game. Students at a middle school level were chosen because of the

WEBLIOGRAPHY-AUGMENTED REALITY

critical time period it is for increase in science interest and building self-confidence in
science.

Both researchers identified natural limitations within their work. Because only one
middle school in a very specific area was chosen, the same results may not be likely in a
other areas. Competition was also not a factor because student groups worked alone, but
groups worked simultaneously may not have had such positive results. Two additional
comments from Bressler and Bodzin (2013) noted that enrichment versus required
activities and the popularization of forensic science in the media could have had
significant impact on student results. From an integration standpoint, requirements of the
game could pose significant limitations. The game required students to have access to
iPhones that were Wi-Fi enabled. For many rural districts, access to multiple mobile
devices can be difficult. While more schools are gaining access to Wi-Fi networks, the
networks themselves may not be able to handle the increased demand of more devices.

Despite the limitations, the research presented contributes positively to the literature in
support of pursuing the use of mobile AR technology and gaming within the classroom.
Appropriate methods and controls appear to have been used during the experimental and
evaluation processes. Additional research is needed to determine the application beyond
middle school. The researchers also suggest pursuing further research into other
elements that may predict flow experiences, if gender would be a predictor in single
gender versus mixed groups, and the short-term and long-term impact on the interest of
students in the sciences.

WEBLIOGRAPHY-AUGMENTED REALITY

DeLucia, A., Francese, R., Passero, I., & Tortoza, G. (2012). A collaborative augmented campus
based on location-aware mobile technology. International Journal of Distance Education
Technologies, 10(1), 55-71.
http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/10.4018/jdet.2012010104

Augmented reality (AR) technologies and mobile devices have enabled users to
participate in a mixed reality setting. DeLucia, Francese, Passero, and Tortoza (2012) did
an evaluation study of a collaborative classroom environment in a university setting.
Researchers combined a physical classroom and an augmented campus using Quick
Response (QR) codes to determine location instead of GPS. The campus was not
accessible via Web-based technology. DeLucia et al. (2012) set out to create a mixed
reality setting, support mobile learning (m-learning) processes with collaboration, and
evaluate the environment in relation to student opinion of the collaborative environment.
A structured learning scenario was provided to the students and evaluated. Steps
included: thread definition, single user information searching and posting, peer review,
and intergroup comparison of results. It is important to note that evaluation was based on
student and not administrative perspective.

Participants included twenty-one students enrolled in a Computer Science Course.


Questionnaires were given before and after tasks that followed the After Scenario
Questionnaire (SQ), were designed using a 7-point Likert scale, and were research based.
Validity of the questions themselves came from validity in prior works. Distinctions

WEBLIOGRAPHY-AUGMENTED REALITY

were made between two different technology skills, computer skills (CMP) and mobile
use skills (MOB). Quantitative and qualitative data were used by analysing usage
statistics of the augmented boards and perceptions from the questionnaires. A correlation
analysis was done to determine relationships between skills and global satisfaction.

Results showed that the overall impression of the learning environment was positive. It
was determined that sharing on the boards contributed to increase feeling of membership.
It was determined that users who are more experienced with mobile applications were
more satisfied. DeLucia et al. (2012) determined that the evaluated results provided
support for the augmented campus being an effective collaborative system to support
content sharing and learning.

The impact of the evaluation study presented in this paper is that it provides evidence to
support learning across context and providing effective collaborative learning
environments. Using QR and mobile technology opens up extensive opportunities for
students to collaborate within the classroom environment both with the instructor and
with each other. Having the augmented classroom available on the mobile device within
a specific location instead of via a Web-based medium encourages students to maintain
active participation in person instead of just a virtual environment. At the same time, the
communication level expands through the use of technology. Using QR codes to
determine location instead of GPS removes the frustration and technological gap of
location-based mechanisms not being able to accurately locate individuals within the
classrooms physical walls. Mobile technologies are becoming more prominent and

WEBLIOGRAPHY-AUGMENTED REALITY

accessible to students who are often literate in digital skills making these technologies
more suited for use as learning devices.

After reading through the information presented, the authors have created a strong case
for the positive impact that augmented classrooms can have within the physical
classroom walls. However, there are limitations. Being a relatively new technology,
there is a limited amount of research to support the positive correlations seen within the
study. The researchers chose a group of students who were already enrolled in a
computer science course. Therefore, the fact that these students are more likely to look
favourably on technology has the potential to skew these positive correlations. With
students that may not be enrolled in a technology course or may not be in a university
environment, results may not be as positive. Students may be less adept with the
technology and therefore return less favourable results on the collaborative learning
environment. DeLucia et al. (2012) suggest that more in depth evaluation needs to be
done to look at user perception in a long-term usage environment. In addition,
suggestions were made by students within the study to make improvements to avoid the
increased potential for information overload within the AR classroom.

Enyedy, N., Danish, J. A., Delacruz, G., & Kumar, M. (2012). Learning physics through play in
an augmented reality environment. International Journal of Computer-Supported
Collaborative Learning, 7(3), 347-378. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11412-012-9150-3

WEBLIOGRAPHY-AUGMENTED REALITY

Learning physic principals is often limited to upper level students with some basic
concepts being taught as early as middle school. Enyedy, Danish, Delacruz, and Kumar
(2012) set out to demonstrate that early elementary students have the capabilities of
gaining conceptual understanding of physics principals through scaffolded scientific
modelling. Augmented reality (AR) and motion-capture technologies helped students
model the physics of force and motion. The activities were described as Learning
Physics through Play project (LPP). The theoretical framework and design were intended
to be tools and models to spark conversations. Students would use pretend play skills to
make predictions. There were four main force and motion focuses within the design:
concept of force, relationship between force and speed, friction, and net forces in two
dimensions. Enyedy et. al (2012) build on established research and extended the research
on computer simulations to teach physics by using younger children in their study, using
curriculum designed around play, and focusing on collaborative versus individual
development. Simulations allowed students to visualize their ideas and share them with
others for discussion. Two main design principles included using socio-dramatic, play to
support inquiry and using progressive symbolism.

Study participants were from the UCLA Lab School and were an equal combination of
first and second graders. The two classrooms used were multi-age classrooms with ages
ranging from six to eight. The ethnicity of the students mirrored the percentages of those
found in California with the exception of having a slightly under-represented Latino
group. The activities took place over a fifteen week period from February to June of
2009. The average lesson lasted ninety minutes. Two case study groups comprised of

WEBLIOGRAPHY-AUGMENTED REALITY

10

eight to nine students was videotaped along with whole class activities. Activities
included AR activities, hands-on investigations, physical modelling activities, and
discussion. Students were given pre- and post-test interview questions. An assessment
protocol was developed specifically for these activities, and assessment items were openended prompts that focused on declarative understanding and conceptual understanding
and problem solving. Interviews were transcribed. Inter-rater reliability was done using
Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC) which determined that a total of nineteen of the
original thirty-one items that span the four instructional objectives were used.
Descriptive statistics and paired-samples t-test were used during the quantitative analysis
while the case studies comprised the qualitative analysis. Wilcoxon signed rank tests
were computed as well.

Results showed through correlation analyses that there was no correlation between
demographics, gender and the assessment scores. Students had significantly higher posttest scores with a large effect size on gain being close to two standard deviations. The
Wilcoxon results showed 91% of students showing gain and 84% increasing
performance greater than one standard deviation. For all four topics, students increased
scores by 23%-67%.

Therefore, it was determined that overall students had made gains

in the learned content that was measured. The qualitative case studies examining the two
design principles were supportive. Case 1 showed that play allowed students a resource
for understanding and thinking was made visible to other students for discussion. Enyedy
et al. (2012) also used Case 1 to demonstrate progressive symbolism as a resource but
found that only 37% of the students made gains indicating they were not as successful

WEBLIOGRAPHY-AUGMENTED REALITY

11

with this topic. Case 2 focused on a unit that was the most successful while being the
most challenging for students. Using the augmented environment, students were able to
work through predictions and make thinking visible to others. Overall the LPP model
provided support for students learning physics in a meaningful way through inquiry,
modelling and play.

One of the first things that really stood out about the research provided by Enyedy et al.
(2012) was the focus on development and design that paralleled current literature. Early
in the paper, they point out that science instruction is not implementing literature that
states that students have the cognitive abilities at early ages to understand scientific topics
if the activities are structured in a scaffolded method. Therefore, students can learn and
engage in meaningful physics tasks in early elementary and beyond if activities are
designed appropriately. The vision-based augmented reality is a technology tool that
facilitates the visualization of the principals in a way that allows for students to not only
interact with the concepts but also allows others the opportunity to see and discuss. It
provides a collaborative play environment that is critical during the early stages of
development and aligns with developmental learning theory. AR also can extend physics
and science learning in older students as it builds upon the computer simulations that
have been successful. It is also important to point out that the researchers explicitly
stated where their work extends upon prior research in teaching force and motion with
technology and provides a basis of comparison for their work. Nationally, students tend
to perform significantly lower on science testing than in other areas. The authors
determined that the goal of suggesting that physics topics are within the reach of

WEBLIOGRAPHY-AUGMENTED REALITY

12

understanding for younger students was reached which could have large scale
implications for when science topics can start to be introduced in school to help improve
overall performance in the sciences.

Especially in terms of application, there are limitations to a study that focuses on a single
school with specific demographics. With over half of the ethnic population consisting of
white students, it is possible that the studies would not be applicable in rural or inner-city
areas where minority populations are significantly higher. The authors suggest areas for
future research in terms of using computer simulations and augmented reality
environments. For instance, they suggest exploring the use of play more thoroughly as a
way to support learning. Additionally, future studies should explore changing both the
environment and the small scale to determine if the augmented reality can support
learning effectively.

Mullen, T. (2011). Prototyping augmented reality. Retrieved from


http://rx9vh3hy4r.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info
%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book
&rft.genre=book&rft.title=Prototyping+augmented+reality&rft.au=Mullen
%2C+Tony&rft.date=2011-0915&rft.pub=Sybex&rft.isbn=9781118036631&rft.externalDocID=9781118180051&para
mdict=en-US

WEBLIOGRAPHY-AUGMENTED REALITY

13

New technologies, including hardware and software applications, are allowing amateur
designers and artists the capability of creating augmented environments. Mullen (2011)
set out to provide those nonprofessional programmers a thorough introduction into the
tools that are available to individuals that wish to begin exploring augmented reality (AR)
applications. Prototyping augmented reality is a resource providing the basics to enable
an individual to understand how to get AR applications running on the computer and how
to create AR content. Mullen (2011) makes note that the focus of the book is not geared
towards programming. Instead, it is meant to help individuals begin work with AR and
inspire them to pursue other possibilities of AR applications. The book begins with a
discussion of what augmented reality is and the basic tools or technologies that apply.
Much of what follows are chapters explaining the Processing programming environment,
modelling, creating animated characters, 3D programming, how to apply the tools to AR,
and android applications. The book guides individuals through AR processes step by step.

For individuals who may be unclear on AR applications or are not quite tech savvy
enough to figure out the numerous applications on their own, Mullen (2011) provides an
enthusiastic and captivating introduction into the potential world of augmented reality.
He captures interest by exploring the history of AR technology in movies, research, arts,
and applications. With a multitude of possible software and hardware possibilities and an
expanded potential for growth, having specific applications that are inexpensive, easily
accessible, and geared to cross-platform potential is a valuable resource for the beginning
user. Mullen (2011) includes details on the specific software, hardware requirements,
and uses. As an instructor of computer science, he has published several books focusing

WEBLIOGRAPHY-AUGMENTED REALITY

14

on teaching individuals to use many of the software applications, like Blender and
character animation, he discusses in this book. The result is a learner-centered format
where the chapters contain step by step guides on how to install and begin using the
applications. Multiple screenshots and figures give a realistic visual to model the use of
the software and expected outcomes. The author takes the time to explain why the steps
are in place and tries to make connections to other areas of technology and general
knowledge. For example, he explains why a 2D Processing sketch uses an x,y,z
coordinate system within the chapter that focuses on Processing software. An area of
concern is the lack of research based applications for the AR technology. While it is
understood that the book focuses on teaching and modelling technology, there is little to
no reference on why to use AR technology. The book is heavily weighted on
encouraging engagement with little emphasis on why to use. That being said, the
scaffolded methodology ensures that an individual has a significant understanding of an
application that may be applied in a future chapter.

Serio, A.D., Ibanez, M.B., & Carlos, D.K. (2013). Impact of an augmented reality system on
students motivation for a visual art course. Computers & Education, 68, 586-596.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.002

While the use of augmented reality (AR) and mobile technology is becoming more
accessible, the research on its implementation in educational settings and in relation to
student motivation is limited. Serior, Ibanez, and Carlos (2013) set out to explore the
relationship between an augmented reality setting and student motivation in an

WEBLIOGRAPHY-AUGMENTED REALITY

15

educational setting. Specifically, the study presented looked at AR use with middle
school students in a visual arts class. Two lessons were set up using a comparison
between a lecture based design in a classroom with a teacher-centered format (TS1) and
an AR design in a laboratory setting with a student-content format (TS2). The AR
environment provided information in a variety of formats including text, audio, video,
and 3D models using desktops and webcams. The Instructional Materials Motivation
Survey (IMMS) was developed following the Attention, Relevance, Confidence, and
Satisfaction (ARCS) model of computer-based instructional design to evaluate student
motivation. IMMS is a validated survey that has been used in other related studies.

Sixty-nine middle school students from a public school in Spain participated in the study.
Students ranged in age from thirteen to sixteen with a little over half being female.
Researchers received parent consent and only two participants were familiar with
augmented reality technology. Quantitative data included the IMMS to evaluate
motivation and descriptive statistics to summarize answers. Surveys were given to
students upon completion of both modules, TS1 and TS2. Paired sample t-tests were
used to compare motivation and tests used a two-sided alpha level of 0.05. Qualitative
data consisted of observations of student interactions and post-experience interviews.
Questions on the survey followed a 5-point Likert-scale. Qualitative data focused on
learnability, efficiency, errors and satisfaction. Due to restraints within the school, there
was no control group, so all students completed both modules.

WEBLIOGRAPHY-AUGMENTED REALITY

16

Results showed that students were more motivated in the AR environment, and the t-test
showed statistically significant increase in motivation as well. Using the ARCS model,
there was significant increase in both attention and satisfaction, with relevance showing
the least significant results between the different modules. Qualitative results indicated
that students perceived that they were more motivated, that good organization of the
material contributed to that, and content gives the impression that it is important to know.
Researchers noted that students were more active in individual exploration during TS2,
but the ability to explore was not as easy in TS1. Likewise, group discussions about the
material spontaneously occurred during TS2 instead of TS1. An unexpected observation
was how quickly students figured out how to use the AR content and how efficiently they
progressed through the material.

With so little research in the use of augmented reality technology in educational settings,
research provided by Di Serio et al.(2012) is important in beginning a foundation for
future studies to build. While there is the issue of not having a control group, statistical
analysis and attention to design make results a reliable place to build future studies from.
Researchers spent a significant amount of effort to establish the role motivation plays in
instruction and how technology can increase motivation in educational settings through
research based strategies. They proceeded to design their modules and data collection
around research driven techniques. It is interesting to note that students all responded in
a positive manner to a technology that they admitted having little experience with. This
adds to the understanding that students are becoming more technology literate and have
skills that can bridge between different technology mediums. Students were afforded the

WEBLIOGRAPHY-AUGMENTED REALITY

17

ability to freely explore the material within the augmented environment which puts them
in a learn-content centered environment that eventually led to learner-learner interactions
that contributed positively to the overall experience. This contrasts with a learner-teacher
centered model that limits not only student interaction with the content but also
interaction with each other unless directed by the teacher. While looking at student
collaboration was not an original intent of the study, the data helps to focus future
research in AR environments to explore the relationship between the technology and
collaborative experiences in relation to learning.

Di Serio et al. (2012) were quick to point out areas of concern and limitations within the
study. Lacking a control group was an important concern, but it is important to explore
the idea that students may have experienced some level of motivation due to the appeal of
a novel technology. Researchers noted that technology is not capable of being a fix for
all of that concerns student engagement within education. However, with the growing
demands of students, technology offers a captivating tool to engage students in content
that would typically be less inviting material. Future research needs to focus on the long
term applications of augmented environments. Di Serio et al. (2012) also suggested
future studies to validate findings that AR can maintain interest and attention in learning
content. An interesting topic to explore would also be the application of AR to reach
multiple learning styles.

You might also like