PreprintPDF Available

ARI2VE Model for Augmented Reality Books - Presentation

Authors:
Immersive Learning Research Network
2020 Conference Online & in VR
The ARI2VE Model for
Augmented Reality Books
(Work-in-Progress)
Josef Buchner & Arkadi Jeghiazaryan
June 21 - 25, 2020 This work is licensed under a Creative
Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0
International License.
The ARI2VE Model for Augmented Reality Books
(Work-in-Progress)
Josef Buchner & Arkadi Jeghiazaryan
Potentials of AR Technology I Science of Instruction and Learning I Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning
information
AR
(e.g. simulation)
task
Engagement
Interaction_ Visualization
Interplay_
The ARI2VE Model for Augmented Reality Books
(Work-in-Progress)
Josef Buchner & Arkadi Jeghiazaryan
Interaction_
The first I in our model stands for the interaction possibilities. These must be considered from the very beginning and
can be realized in several ways, especially in AR-supported learning materials:
· Interaction with the AR objects: Here, the objects and visualizations represented by AR are in focus. Learners
can zoom in, zoom out, rotate, and model them to create new objects and get immediate feedback on the
changes made.
· Interaction can also take the form of social interaction with other learners and with teachers. The AR books
then are shared by several learners and the learning content is discussed and debated together.
1
1
2
2
The ARI2VE Model for Augmented Reality Books
(Work-in-Progress)
Josef Buchner & Arkadi Jeghiazaryan
information
AR
(e.g. simulation)
task
Interplay_
The second I represent interplay and describes how the different media variations offered in our AR books relate to each other,
i.e. texts, pictures and tasks do not stand alone but are supplemental. The augmented object is also included here and contextualized
in the examination of the text. These considerations are based primarily on the multiple representation principle (Ainsworth, 2014).
According to this principle, external representations have different functions, such as the addition of tasks to the learning content
and/or a supporting function in building a deeper understanding, e.g. when AR objects illustrate relations or concretize abstract
concepts.
The ARI2VE Model for Augmented Reality Books
(Work-in-Progress)
Josef Buchner & Arkadi Jeghiazaryan
AR
(e.g. simulation)
task
Engagement
Visualization
AR stands like no other technology for being able to make the invisible visible and to make abstract processes easier to understand through stimulating representations
(e.g. Sotiriou & Bogner, 2008). Due to the very definition of AR, we cannot understand AR representations as a single medium. Instead, AR systems enable the
integrated, i.e. temporally and spatially parallel, representation of different forms of representation (Ainsworth, 2014)]. Audios, videos, animations, 3D objects, even
simulations could be components of AR elements (Wu et al., 2013). If different forms of media are presented together, we speak of multimedia learning. For this reason,
learning with AR should be based on the principles of the Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning (CTML) (Mayer, 2014; 2019) in order to support learners during the
examination of visualizations and not to overload the capacities of their working memory (Sweller, 2020).
Furthermore, it is essential to consider with which focus the AR visualization was implemented and whether its reputation is essential for the learning process (Buchner &
Zumbach, 2020). The focus can be the extension of the real object or image that is actually at the center of the learning process, as in the case of the extension of an
image during a museum visit with information about the artist. Alternatively, the central message of the AR visualization is found in the AR object itself. If the AR
visualization is essential for learning progress, it promotes the achievement of the desired learning goals. However, AR can also be used as an "additum" to address
personal preferences and interests and to facilitate personal learning paths.
The ARI2VE Model for Augmented Reality Books
(Work-in-Progress)
Josef Buchner & Arkadi Jeghiazaryan
To engage students during the use of our AR books is realized
through tasks. These can be found on every double- page and vary
concerning the learning activities necessary to solve them. Tasks are
central to each learning environment (e.g. Merrill, 2018) and involve
different activities, e.g. summarizing, drawing, creating Mind-Maps;
they ensure that the information presented is actively processed by
the learners and integrated into their prior knowledge (Fiorella &
Mayer, 2016). They also serve as a self-regulated check of the
learning progress and indicate the learners whether they can apply the
newly acquired knowledge (Kerres & de Witt, 2003). The tasks, in
turn, should interact with the texts, images and AR visualizations and
can be completed by the learners in various ways. In our books, we
have designed the tasks in such a way that the students can draw
and/or write directly into the book with a pencil. The tasks can also
be offered and worked on directly via AR, like shown in Rambli et al.
(2013). Materials outside of the book can also be used as a basis for
the tasks. For example, it would be quite conceivable that learners
collaboratively solve a task on a poster or whiteboard app on a tablet
computer and then present it to their fellow learners (e.g. Duran,
2017). Here, teachers should decide how and where the solutions to
the tasks should be recorded, based primarily on the learning
objectives.
task
Engagement
The ARI2VE Model for Augmented Reality Books
(Work-in-Progress)
Josef Buchner & Arkadi Jeghiazaryan
Potentials of AR Technology I Science of Instruction and Learning I Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning
information
AR
(e.g. simulation)
task
Engagement
Interaction_ Visualization
Interplay_
References (preliminary)
Ainsworth, S. (2014). The Multiple Representation Principle in Multimedia Learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning
(Second Edition, pp. 464–486). Cambridge University Press.
Buchner, J., & Zumbach, J. (2020). Augmented Reality in Teacher Education: A Framework to support Teachers’ Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge.
Italian Journal of Educational Technology, IJET-ONLINE FIRST. https://doi.org/10.17471/2499-4324/1151
Duran, D. (2017). Learning-by-teaching. Evidence and implications as a pedagogical mechanism. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 54(5),
476–484. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2016.1156011
Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). Eight Ways to Promote Generative Learning. Educational Psychology Review, 28(4), 717–741.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9348-9
Kerres, M., & Witt, C. D. (2003). A Didactical Framework for the Design of Blended Learning Arrangements. Journal of Educational Media, 28(2–3), 101–113.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1358165032000165653
Mayer, R. E. (2014). Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning(Second Edition, pp.
43–71). Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2019). Thirty years of research on online learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 33(2), 152–159. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3482
Merrill, M. D. (2018). Using the First Principles of Instruction to Make Instruction Effective, Efficient, and Engaging. In R. E. West (Ed.), Foundations of Learning
and Instructional Design Technology: The Past, Present, and Future of Learning and Instructional Design Technology. EdTech Books.
https://edtechbooks.org/lidtfoundations/using_the_first_principles_of_instruction
Rambli, D. R. A., Matcha, W., & Sulaiman, S. (2013). Fun Learning with AR Alphabet Book for Preschool Children. Procedia Computer Science, 25, 211–219.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2013.11.026
Sotiriou, S., & Bogner, F. X. (2008). Visualizing the invisible: Augmented reality as an innovative science education scheme. Advanced Science Letters, 1,
114–122.
Sweller, J. (2020). Cognitive load theory and educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(1), 1–16.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09701-3
Wu, H.-K., Wen-Yu Lee, S., Chang, H.-Y., & Liang, J.-C. (2013). Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education. Computers &
Education, 62, 41–49.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
In order to create an initial framework for learning-by-teaching, this article reviews a body of relevant research, from a historical perspective, gathering evidence about the potential and the limits of this pedagogical mechanism. Results indicate that the more complex the teaching activity is, the more opportunities there are to learn by teaching. This explanatory framework may help to develop a conception of teaching and learning consistent with the Knowledge Society and to promote the incorporation and extension of practices that provide opportunities for students to learn by teaching their peers, such as cooperative learning, peer tutoring or peer assessment.
Article
Full-text available
Generative learning involves actively making sense of to-be-learned information by mentally reorganizing and integrating it with one’s prior knowledge, thereby enabling learners to apply what they have learned to new situations. In this article, we present eight learning strategies intended to promote generative learning: summarizing, mapping, drawing, imagining, self-testing, self-explaining, teaching, and enacting. First, we provide an overview of generative learning theory, grounded in Wittrock’s (1974) generative model of comprehension and reflected in more recent frameworks of active learning, such as Mayer’s (2014) select-organize-integrate (SOI) framework. Next, for each of the eight generative learning strategies, we provide a description, review exemplary research studies, discuss potential boundary conditions, and provide practical recommendations for implementation. Finally, we discuss the implications of generative learning for the science of learning, and we suggest directions for further research.
Article
Full-text available
This paper describes the design and evaluation of an AR alphabet book, an Augmented Reality based book for teaching the alphabet to preschool children. Used together with camera and computer, children could view the superimposed virtual alphabet in a fun and interactive manner using the pattern markers as an interaction tool. Generally, teaching young children could be difficult this is due to the focus of young children is different from elderly since they could only focus on something for short period of time. Introducing the fun and interactive learning could grab the attention therefore enhance teaching and learning for young learner. Fun-learning emphasized interactive learning through play, songs; dance, drama and the use of information and communication technology (ICT). Researches showed that fun learning also increase the ability to memorize and understanding of the user. Flashcard is one of the learning approaches to teach children the alphabet. The tangible manner of flashcard introduce the interaction of learning therefore it could create the joyful learning. However, the potential of flash-card could be further enhance through the use of AR technology. Therefore, introducing the use of AR could encompass fun learning since AR offer rich media learning. Besides displaying each alphabet upon presentation of its corresponding pattern marker, children have the options to see 3D models of objects that begin with each alphabet character. Additional book features includes pattern markers for children to view animation of how each letter is drawn and jigsaw puzzle game for each letter to test children understanding. An informal study was conducted among 15 preschool children aged between 5-6 years old to examine user perception of the book. The preliminary results indicate the children reacted positively towards the books; most reported they like and enjoy using the AR book. Observation of the children behaviors during study corroborates this finding. Most students requested to use the AR book repeatedly. These results suggest the potential of AR book as a tool to create fun learning environment especially for preschool children. Furthermore, the brief interview with the teacher of the preschool also suggested that the system seem to grab the attention of the children.
Article
Full-text available
Blended learning arrangements combine technology based learning with face-to-face learning and have become quite popular in different contexts. However, models for their didactical design that are based on theoretical concepts are still missing. The article presents a general framework that describes didactical design decisions regarding the elements of a blended learning arrangement (content, communication, construction) and the choice of the delivery system. Special emphasis is placed on the cost that is associated with different communication scenarios for the learner and must influence design decisions.
Article
Full-text available
An innovative approach (which we labeled CONNECT) presents a pedagogical and technological mode crosscutting the boundaries between schools and science centers as well as involving both students and teachers as playful learners. Learning pathways are offered to facilitate in situ learning by implementing an innovative educational environment provided by an augmenting technology mode. This paper describes the educational and technical pathway setting and its implementation at a selected museum site as well as its relevant evaluation figures. The specific theme maintains the issue of a typical physics school content (of friction). Participation in the proposed activities positively influences students' intrinsic motivation as well as cognitive learning. Combining school science with students' activities in a science museum, as well as introducing advanced visualizations to a physical phenomenon, seems to make a substantial difference.
Article
This paper presents a personal account of developments in research on online learning over the past 30 years. Research on how to design online instruction represents an example of applying the science of learning to education. It contributes to the science of learning (as exemplified by developments in cognitive load theory, the cognitive theory of multimedia learning, and incorporating metacognitive, motivational, and affective aspects of learning), the science of instruction (as exemplified by the continuing development of research‐based principles of instructional design), and the science of assessment (as exemplified by supplementing self‐report surveys and retention tests with multi‐level transfer tests, log file data during learning, and cognitive neuroscience measures of cognitive processing during learning). Some recurring themes are that learning is caused by instructional methods rather than instructional media, so research on should focus on features that are uniquely afforded by digital learning environments; practice should be grounded in rigorous and systematic research, including value‐added experiments aimed at pinpointing the active ingredients in online instruction; research in online learning should identify boundary conditions under which instructional techniques are most effective; and research in online learning should test and contribute to learning theory.
Article
Cognitive load theory provides instructional recommendations based on our knowledge of human cognition. Evolutionary psychology is used to assume that knowledge should be divided into biologically primary information that we have specifically evolved to acquire and biologically secondary information that we have not specifically evolved to acquire. Primary knowledge frequently consists of generic-cognitive skills that are important to human survival and cannot be taught because they are acquired unconsciously while secondary knowledge is usually domain-specific in nature and requires explicit instruction in education and training contexts. Secondary knowledge is first processed by a limited capacity, limited duration working memory before being permanently stored in long-term memory from where unlimited amounts of information can be transferred back to working memory to govern action appropriate for the environment. The theory uses this cognitive architecture to design instructional procedures largely relevant to complex information that requires a reduction in working memory load. Many of those instructional procedures can be most readily used with the assistance of educational technology.
Chapter
This chapter argues that to understand the ways that multiple representations should be designed to support learning, we need to consider the pedagogical functions that they play alongside their structural form. Multiple representations play a complementary role when learners exploit differences in computational properties or information by switching between representations and selecting the appropriate representation for the task at hand. Constraining benefits can be achieved when we support learners’ understanding of a second representation by relating it to a familiar representation. Learners can gain deeper understanding when they abstract over multiple representations to achieve insight into the nature of the representations and the domain. This chapters reviews studies that have used multiple representations for these purposes and identifies some of the circumstances that infiuence the effectiveness of using multiple representations in these ways.
Article
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.