Although augmented reality (AR) has gained much research attention in recent years, the term AR was given different meanings by varying researchers. In this article, we first provide an overview of definitions, taxonomies, and technologies of AR. We argue that viewing AR as a concept rather than a type of technology would be more productive for educators, researchers, and designers. Then we identify certain features and affordances of AR systems and applications. Yet, these compelling features may not be unique to AR applications and can be found in other technological systems or learning environments (e.g., ubiquitous and mobile learning environments). The instructional approach adopted by an AR system and the alignment among technology design, instructional approach, and learning experiences may be more important. Thus, we classify three categories of instructional approaches that emphasize the ''roles,'' ''tasks,'' and ''locations,'' and discuss what and how different categories of AR approaches may help students learn. While AR offers new learning opportunities, it also creates new challenges for educators. We outline technological, pedagogical, learning issues related to the implementation of AR in education. For example, students in AR environments may be cognitively overloaded by the large amount of information they encounter, the multiple technological devices they are required to use, and the complex tasks they have to complete. This article provides possible solutions for some of the challenges and suggests topics and issues for future research.

Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education

This paper surveys the current state-of-the-art of technology, systems and applications in Augmented Reality. It describes work performed by many different research groups, the purpose behind each new Augmented Reality system, and the difficulties and problems encountered when building some Augmented Reality applications. It surveys mobile augmented reality systems challenges and requirements for successful mobile systems. This paper summarizes the current applications of Augmented Reality and speculates on future applications and where current research will lead Augmented Reality's development. Challenges augmented reality is facing in each of these applications to go from the laboratories to the industry, as well as the future challenges we can forecast are also discussed in this paper. Section 1 gives an introduction to what Augmented Reality is and the motivations for developing this technology. Section 2 discusses Augmented Reality Technologies with computer vision methods, AR devices, interfaces and systems, and visualization tools. The mobile and wireless systems for Augmented Reality are discussed in Section 3. Four classes of current applications that have been explored are described in Section 4. These applications were chosen as they are the most famous type of applications encountered when researching AR apps. The future of augmented reality and the challenges they will be facing are discussed in Section 5.

Augmented reality technologies, systems and applications

The usefulness of mobile devices has increased greatly in recent years allowing users to perform more tasks in a mobile context. This increase in usefulness has come at the expense of the usability of these devices in some contexts. We conducted a small review of mobile usability models and found that usability is usually measured in terms of three attributes; effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction. Other attributes, such as cognitive load, tend to be overlooked in the usability models that are most prominent despite their likely impact on the success or failure of an application. To remedy this we introduces the PACMAD (People At the Centre of Mobile Application Development) usability model which was designed to address the limitations of existing usability models when applied to mobile devices. PACMAD brings together significant attributes from different usability models in order to create a more comprehensive model. None of the attributes that it includes are new, but the existing prominent usability models ignore one or more of them. This could lead to an incomplete usability evaluation. We performed a literature search to compile a collection of studies that evaluate mobile applications and then evaluated the studies using our model.

/pdf/usability-of-mobile-applications-literature-review-and-2sgkvggy18.pdf

Usability of mobile applications: literature review and rationale for a new usability model

Augmented reality (AR) technology is mature for creating learning experiences for K-12 (pre-school, grade school, and high school) educational settings. We reviewed the applications intended to complement traditional curriculum materials for K-12. We found 87 research articles on augmented reality learning experiences (ARLEs) in the IEEE Xplore Digital Library and other learning technology publications. Forty-three of these articles conducted user studies, and seven allowed the computation of an effect size to the performance of students in a test. In our meta-analysis, research show that ARLEs achieved a widely variable effect on student performance from a small negative effect to a large effect, with a mean effect size of 0.56 or moderate effect. To complement this finding, we performed a qualitative analysis on the design aspects for ARLEs: display hardware, software libraries, content authoring solutions, and evaluation techniques. We explain that AR incur three inherent advantages: real world annotation, contextual visualization, and vision-haptic visualization. We illustrate these advantages through the exemplifying prototypes, and ground these advantages to multimedia learning theory, experiential learning theory, and animate vision theory. Insights from this review are aimed to inform the design of future ARLEs.

Augmented Reality Learning Experiences: Survey of Prototype Design and Evaluation

We define Augmented Reality (AR) as a real-time direct or indirect view of a physical real-world environment that has been enhanced/augmented by adding virtual computer-generated information to it [1]. AR is both interactive and registered in 3D as well as combines real and virtual objects. Milgram’s Reality-Virtuality Continuum is defined by Paul Milgram and Fumio Kishino as a continuum that spans between the real environment and the virtual environment comprise Augmented Reality and Augmented Virtuality (AV) in between, where AR is closer to the real world and AV is closer to a pure virtual environment, as seen in Fig. 1.1 [2].

/pdf/augmented-reality-an-overview-3xvvb32kvv.pdf

Augmented Reality: An Overview

Technology-enhanced learning, employing novel forms of content representation and education service delivery by enhancing the visual perception of the real environment of the user, is favoured by proponents of educational inclusion for learners with physical disabilities. Such an augmented reality computer-mediated learning system has been developed as part of an EU funded research project, namely the CONNECT project. The CONNECT project brings together schools and science centres, and produces novel information and communication technologies based on augmented reality (AR) and web-based streaming and communication, in order to support learning in a variety of settings. The CONNECT AR interactive learning environment can assist users to better contextualize and reinforce their learning in school and in other settings where people learn (i.e. science centres and home). The CONNECT concept and associated technologies encourage users to visit science centres and perform experiments that are not possible in school. They can also build on these experiences back at school and at home with visual augmentations that they are communicated through web-based streaming technology. This paper particularly focuses on a user-centred evaluation approach of human factors and pedagogical aspects of the CONNECT system, as applied to a special needs user group. The main focus of the paper is on highlighting the human factors issues and challenges, in terms of wearability and technology acceptance, while elaborating on some qualitative aspects of the pedagogical effectiveness of the instructional medium that AR technology offers for this group of learners.

Human factors and qualitative pedagogical evaluation of a mobile augmented reality system for science education used by learners with physical disabilities

Argeroula Petrou

Papers

Human factors and qualitative pedagogical evaluation of a mobile augmented reality system for science education used by learners with physical disabilities