Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Augmented Reality for Learning and Teaching
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Saving this for later?

Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime - even offline.

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Augmented Reality for Learning and Teaching

1,275
views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology

1 Comment
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Thanks a million for making your slides avaiable for the public for everyone to get benefits!! thanks again
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,275
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
30
Comments
1
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Augmented reality for learning and teaching:  A literature review of the state-of-the-art Yu-Chang Hsu Anthony Saba
  • 2. Azuma's (1997) definitions of AR
        • Combines real and virtual
        • Interactive in real time [Jurassic Park virtual objects-- not interactive]
        • Registered in 3D [football information on TV--2D]
    •  
    •  
  • 3. Virtuality Continuum
    • Milgram & Kishino (1994)
    •  
  • 4. AR Technologies : Data Reading
    • Sensors : Receive information to help programs decide what to do next
      • Camera (tracking AR users and physical objects)
      • GPS (location-based activities)
      • Accelerometer (e.g., Wii remote)
      • Gyroscope (sensing orientation, such as tilt, of objects)
    • Labels and Codes (used with Camera or other sensors)
        • RFID ( Radio-frequency identification)
        • QR (Quick Response) codes
          • Hand Manipulated 
            • Individual cards allowing interaction among learners
          • Embedded (in printed books)
          • Wearable
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
  • 5. AR Technologies: Interfaces
    • User Interfaces (information display and/or data entry )
      • Head Mounted Displays
      • Monitor Viewing
        • Mobile handheld
        • Computer monitor
      • Projection
        • Group Interaction 
        • Individual Interaction (with the system)
    •  
    •  
    •   Supplemental Interface
      • Mannequins in the medical field
        • Connected to Monitors and/or other peripherals
        • Input on/through the mannequins
        • Haptic feedback
    •  
    •  
    •  
  • 6. Potential Benefit of AR in Education
        • Reduce cognitive load
        • Simulation situated in physical environment—learning in context
        • Diversity in applications for various implementations
        • Physical exercise through psychomotor activities
        • Multi-sensory feedback
  • 7. Research Question
        • What are the state-of-the-art AR applications for teaching and learning reported in peer-reviewed journals from 2000-2011?
          • Subject domains
          • Education levels
          • Types of systems
  • 8. Research Methods
      • Keywords search
        • augmented reality AND (teaching or learning or education or training). 
        • EBSCO
      • Inclusion
        • 2000-2010 peer-reviewed journal articles
        • Types of research:
          • Empirical studies on learning and teaching;
          • Design and Development for learning and teaching
      • Coding
        • Open coding
          • research questions, participant characteristics, subject domains
        • Constant comparison and revising coding 
          • Learning interaction 
            • with system
            • among learners (individual or collaborative learning)
          • Types of AR system and technologies used
  • 9. General Findings from AR Research (20 articles)
    • Regions : 
      • US: 10 ( 50% ), 
      • Europe: 6 (30%), 
      • Asia-Pacific: 4 (20%)
    •  
    • School level :
      • K-12: 11 ( 55% )
      • Medical and BioMed: 5 (25%)
      • University: 2 (10%)
      • K-12 + University: 2 (10%)
    •  
    • Usage : 
      • Individual learning: 9 (45%)
      • Group: 9 (45%)
      • Combined Modes: 2 (10%)
  • 10. General Findings (continued)
    • Disciplines : 
      • Majority: 70%
        • Science: 6 (30%)
        • Medicine: 6 (30%)
        • Engineering 2 (10%)
    •  
      • Other : 30%
        • Math: 1 (5%)
        • Interdisciplinary (math/scientific literacy): 1 (5%)
        • Special education and rehabilitation training: 1 (5%)
        • Urban planning education: 1 (5%)
        • Industrial training: 1 (5%)
        • Art education: 1 (5%)
  • 11. General Findings (continued)
    • Types of Display Systems :
      • Computer Monitor Displays (plus mannequins or marker cards): 8 ( 40% )
      • Mobile Handheld Displays: 6 ( 30% )
      • Projection Systems: 4 (20%)
      • Head Mounted Displays: 2 (10%)
  • 12. Diverse Applications
  • 13. Mobile Handheld Display
      • Dunleavy, Dede, & Mitchell (2008) [Collaborative/GPS location-based] (USA)
      • Middle school and high school students
      • Math & Scientific literacy
      • Scenario: Alien Contact!
      • investigate alien's encounter with Earth with inter-dependent pieces of information
      • Four-student team
      • Results
        • High engagement due to
          • Handheld and GPS
          • Collecting Data Outside
      • Concern
        • GPS Issue
        • Complexity and high management need (difficult to scale up)
        • Much requirement on students (technology/content knowledge/collaboration task)
  • 14. Mobile handheld through Camera Scanning/Sensor (RFID)
      • Liu, Tan, & Chu (2009) EULER [Ubiquitous Learning with Educational Resources] (EULER)] (Taiwan)
      • 5th graders and their teachers
      • Wetland ecology
      • AR
        • contextual content
        • virtual objects overlay
    • Learning
      • collaborative learning
      • context-aware learning
    • Outcomes
      • AR group better than control group (textbook only) on post-test
        • no control of time on learning
    •   Perceptions: Easy to use; believe to help their learning.
    •  
  • 15. Computer Monitor +  Mannequin
      • Botden et al. (2007)  (Netherlands)
      • AR vs. VR
      • Surgery: Translocation and suturing tasks
      • All participants used both system; randomly decided which go first.
      • Experts and Intermediate Professionals consider AR better for training resident surgeons than VR, regarding
        • realism, didactic value, haptic feedback, and usefulness
    •  
  • 16. Projection- Group-based
      •   Birchfield et al. (2009)
      • Situated Multimedia Arts Learning Lab [SMALLab] (USA)
      • Group & Collaborative learning
      • Urban high school
      • Earth Science
        • Building “layer cake” (rock formations and sediments)
      • Reinforced concepts taught previously
      • AR Components and interaction
        • Control virtual element to build the layered structure of rock formations together
        • Shake Wii remote to generate fault events
      • Sig. gains in concept learning
      • Engagement and modeling
      • Collaboration and negotiation
  • 17. Projection- Individual-based in Groups
      • Hsiao (2010) CARLS (Chemistry AR Learning System) (Taiwan)
      • Group (non-collaborative learning)
      • High school student (7&8th grade) in Taiwan
      • Practice with chemistry concepts
        • Jumping (to reach the answers)
        • Stretching (to catch answer)
        • Boxing (to hit certain times for the correct answer)
        • KMCAI (regular keyboard-mouse group)
      • Learning outcomes:
        • physical activities group did better on science knowledge test
        •  
  • 18.   Head Mounted Displays
      • Kaufmann & Schmalstieg (2003)  [Construct3D] (Austria)
        • Math/geometry
        • Develop Spatial ability
        • Experience dynamic geometry
        • Potential for collaborative learning through negotiating modifications
        • Engagement in and motivation due to
          • Co-interacting with virtual objects
          • Making modifications
          • “ walk around and under” to appreciate their creation”
  • 19. Computer Monitor +  Marker Cards
    • Liarokapis et al. (2004)  (UK)
    • Mechanical engineering education
      • machines, vehicles, and tools
      • help students explore the multidimensional
      • augmentation of materials in various levels of detail
      • Space-saving; mobile
      • Design and development—
        • needs research on learning
    •  
  • 20. Computer Monitor + Wearable Marker Cards
    • Commercial Example (K-12)
    • LarnGear chemistry experiments (2008)
    • http://goo.gl/HsJPn
    • Commercial Example: Medical Field
    • http://goo.gl/M8y55
  • 21. Conclusions
      • AR is more than presentation
        • Interaction and collaboration
        • Engagement and learning improvement
        • Contextual relevance and immediacy
      • Some Challenge
        • Scalability issues due to learning design
        • AR system literacy
      • Good diversity
        • AR systems
        • Learning domains
        • International research
      • Many examples available, but research on learning lacking in
        • Embedded and manipulated marker cards (e.g., chemistry experiments, human organs) 
    •  
      • Disciplines other than STEM education and Medicine, such as
        • Humanities and social sciences (e.g., history, language learning, etc.)
  • 22. Contact:   [email_address]   [email_address]