Advertisement

Instructional Designs and Educational Technologies Within Augmented Reality Transmedia Storytelling: IDET ARTS

  • David R. SquiresEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Educational Media and Technology Yearbook book series (EMTY, volume 42)

Abstract

A mixed methodology study measuring the usage rates of Augmented Reality (AR) information overlay mapping time-on-task in informal learning environments at a local art museum. This study investigates whether AR systems provide a uniquely beneficial learning context due to AR’s native function to overlay information onto physical spaces at an art museum and the impact on participant perceived self-efficacy and overall engagement within the AR-enhanced environment. Participants also took part in an open-ended survey within the application. The quantitative data collected suggest that participants were highly engaged and utilized the application at the art museum extensively (N = 143); the qualitative results indicated that AR participants were exceedingly motivated and perceived an enhanced sense of engagement with the exhibit sites.

Keywords

Augmented reality Mixed-methods AR storytelling 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Joseph Schenk, Director of the Art Museum of South Texas; Deborah Fullerton, Curator of Exhibitions; Karol Stewart, Coordinator of Community Services; Sara Morgan, Assistant Director; Sheri Emerick, Development Officer; Linda Rodriguez, Curator of Education; and Angela Resendez.

References

  1. Azuma, R. (2004). Overview of augmented reality. Proceedings of the conference on SIGGRAPH 2004 course notes – GRAPH ‘04.Google Scholar
  2. Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bressler, D., & Bodzin, A. (2013). A mixed methods assessment of students’ flow experiences during a mobile augmented reality science game. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(6), 505–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bujak, K. R., Radu, I., Catrambone, R., MacIntyre, B., Zheng, R., & Golubski, G. (2013). A psychological perspective on augmented reality in the mathematics classroom. Computers & Education, 68, 536–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Creswell, J. W. (2010). Designing and conducting mixed methods research + the mixed methods reader (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  6. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  7. Google.com. (2018). Features – Google analytics. [online] Available at: http://www.google.com/analytics/features/. Accessed 1 May 2018.
  8. Johnson, L., Haywood, K., Levine, A., Willis, H., & Smith, R. (2011). The 2011 Horizon Report. Austin, Texas: New Media Consortium, & Educause. Google Scholar
  9. Juan, M., Mendez-Lopez, M., Perez-Hernandez, E., & Albiol-Perez, S. (2014). Augmented reality for the assessment of children’s spatial memory in real settings. PLoS One, 9(12), e113751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kesim, M., & Ozarslan, Y. (2012). Augmented reality in education: Current technologies and the potential for education. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 297–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lin, T., Duh, H. B., Li, N., Wang, H., & Tsai, C. (2013). An investigation of learners’ collaborative knowledge construction performances and behavior patterns in an augmented reality simulation system. Computers & Education, 68, 314–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Squires, D. (2018). Bridging the learning gap augmented reality’s impact on associative information processing, cognitive load, and working memory: A mixed-methods research study. Journal of Educational Technology, 15(1), 17.Google Scholar
  13. Tang, A., Owen, C., Biocca, F., & Mou, W. (2003). Performance evaluation of augmented reality for directed assembly. Virtual and Augmented Reality Applications in Manufacturing, 311–331.Google Scholar
  14. Wojciechowski, R., & Cellary, W. (2013). Evaluation of learners’ attitude toward learning in ARIES augmented reality environments. Computers & Education, 68, 570–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Instructional Design and Educational Technology Program, Texas A&M University-Corpus ChristiCorpus ChristiUSA

Personalised recommendations