Abstract
Despite the potential of augmented reality (AR) in enabling students to construct new understanding, little is known about how the processes and interactions with the multimedia lead to increased learning. This study seeks to explore the affordances of an AR tool on learning that is focused on the science concept of magnets and magnetic fields. Seventy students in grades 5 through 7 participated in the study in a non- AR or AR condition. Findings showed that students in the AR condition interacted with the magnets significantly longer and demonstrated higher amounts of teamwork. In interviews, students identified five affordances of the AR on learning that are closely related to the literature on dynamic visualizations, such as the ability to visualize invisible phenomenon and scaffolds that focus attention on relevant information.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allen, S. (2004). Designs for learning; Studying science museum exhibits that do more than entertain. Science Education, 88(Suppl. 1), S17-S33. doi: 10.1002/sce.20016
Ainsworth, S., & Van Labeke, N. (2004). Multiple forms of dynamic representation. Learning and Instruction, 14, 241–255. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.002
Asai, K., Sugimoto, Y., & Billinghurst, M. (2010). Exhibition of lunar surface navigation system facilitating collaboration between children and parents in science museum. Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGGRAPH Conference on Virtual Reality Continuum and Its Application in Industry, 119–124.
Borun, M. (2003). Space Command summative evaluation. Philadelphia: Franklin Institute Science Museum. Available http://informalscience.org/evaluations/report_24.pdf [accessed September 2011].
Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(1), 7–22. doi: 10.1007/ s10956-008-9119-1
Falk, J. (1983). Time and field trips: A look at environmental effect on learning. Journal of Biological Education, 17, 137–142.
Falk, J., Moussouri, T., & Coulson, D. (1998). The effect of visitors’ agendas on museum learning. Curator, 41(2), 107–120. doi: 10.1111/j.2151-6952.1998.tb00822.x
Falk, J., & Needham, M. (2011). Measuring the impact of a science center on its community. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(1), 1–12. doi: 10.1002/tea.20394
Gutwill, J., & Allen, S. (2010). Facilitating family group inquiry at science museum exhibits. Science Education, 94(4), 710–742. doi: 10.1002/sce.20387
Hall, T. & Bannon, L. (2006). Designing ubiquitous computing to enhance children’s learning in museums. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(4), 231–243. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00177.x
Heath, C., vom Lehn, D., & Osborne, J. (2005). Interaction and interactives: Collaboration and participation with computer-based exhibits. Public Understanding of Science, 14(1), 91–101. doi: 10.1177/0963662505047343
Hegarty, M. (2004). Dynamic visualizations and learning: Getting to the difficult questions. Learning and Instruction, 14, 343–351. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.007
Kirkley, S., & Kirkley, J. (2004). Creating next generation blended learning environments using mixed reality, video games, and simulations. TechTrends, 49(3), 42–53. doi: 10.1007/BF02763646
Kozma, R. (2003). The material features of multiple representations and their cognitive and social affordances for science understanding. Learning and Instruction, 13, 205–226. doi: 10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00021-X
Kuhl, T., Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P., & Gemballa, S. (2011). Can differences in learning strategies explain the benefits of learning from static and dynamic visualizations? Computers & Education, 56, 176–187. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.08.008
Laursen, D. (2012). Co-participation among school children around a computer-based exhibit. Social Studies of Science, 43(1), 97117. doi:10.1177/0306312712455114
Linn, M. (2003). Technology and science education: Starting points, research programs, and trends. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 727–758. doi: 10.1080/09500690305017
Lowe, R. (2004) Interrogation of a dynamic visualization during learning. Learning and Instruction, 14, 257–274. doi: 10.1016/j. learninstruc.2004.06.003
Lowe, R., & Ploetzner, R. (2004). Dynamic visualizations and learning. Learning and Instruction, 14, 235–240. doi: 10.1016/j. learninstruc.2004.06.001
Luke, J., Stein, J., Foutz, S., & Adams, M. (2007). Research to practice: Testing a tool for assessing critical thinking in art museum programs. Journal of Museum Education, 32(3), 123–136.
National Research Council (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places and pursuits. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
New Media Consortium (2012). NMC Horizon Project Short List: 2012 K-12 Edition. Austin, TX: Author.
Phillips, L., Norris, S., & Macnab, J. (2010). Visualization in mathematics, reading and science education. Dordrect, Netherlands: Springer.
Rapp, D., & Kurby, C. (2008). The ‘ins’ and ‘outs’ of learning: Internal representations and external visualizations. In J. Gilbert, M. Reiner, & M. Nakhleh (Eds.), Visualization: Theory and practice in science education (pp. 29–52). Dordrecht: Springer.
Rennie, L., & Williams, G. (2002). Science centers and scientific literacy: Promoting a relationship with science. Science Education, 86, 706–726. doi: 10.1002/ sce.10030
Sandifer, C. (2003). Technological novelty and open-endedness: Two characteristics of interactive exhibits that contribute to the holding of visitor attention in a science museum. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(2), 121–137. doi: 10.1002/ tea.10068
Schnotz, W., & Lowe, R. (2008). A unified view of learning from animated and static graphics. In R. Lowe & W. Schnotz (Eds.), Learning with animation: Research and design implications (pp. 304–356). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Schwan, S., & Riempp, R. (2004). The cognitive benefits of interactive videos. Learning to tie nautical knots. Learning and Instruction, 14(3), 293–305. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.005
Squire, K., & Klopfer, E. (2007). Augmented reality simulations on handheld computers. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(3), 371413. doi: 10.1080/10508400701413435
Szymanski, M., Aoki, P., Grinter, R., Hurst, A., Thornton, J., & Woodruff, A. (2008). Sotto Voce: Facilitating social learning in a historic house. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 17, 5–34. doi: 10.1007/ s10606-007-9067-y
Tversky, B., Morrison, J., & Betrancourt, M. (2002). Animation: Can it facilitate? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 57, 247–262. doi:10.1006/ijhc.1017
Uttal, K., & O’Doherty, K. (2008). Comprehending and learning from ‘Visualizations’: A developmental perspective. In J. Gilbert, M. Reiner, & M. Nakhleh (Eds.), Visualization: Theory and practice in science education (pp. 53–72). Dordrecht: Springer.
Vavra, K., Janjic-Watrich, V., Loerke, K., Phillips, L., Norris, S., & Macnab, J. (2011). Visualization in science education. Alberta Science Education Journal, 41(1), 22–30.
Yoon, S., Elinich, K., Wang, J., Steinmeier, C., & Tucker, S. (2012a). Using augmented reality and knowledge-building scaffolds to improve learning in a science museum. International Journal of Computer- Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(4), 519–541. doi:10.1007/s11412-012-9156-x
Yoon, S., Elinich, K., Wang, J., Steinmeier, C., Van Schooneveld, J. (2012b). Learning Impacts of a Digital Augmentation in a Science Museum. Visitor Studies, 15(2), 157–170. doi:10.1080/10645578.2012.715007
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yoon, S.A., Wang, J. Making the Invisible Visible in Science Museums Through Augmented Reality Devices. TECHTRENDS TECH TRENDS 58, 49–55 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-013-0720-7
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-013-0720-7