Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Applications of Augmented Reality in Informal Science Learning Sites: a Review

  • Published:
Journal of Science Education and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The importance of increasing interest in the STEM disciplines has been noted in a number of recent national reports. While many previous studies have focused on such efforts inside of the formal classroom, comparatively few have looked closely at informal learning environments. We investigate the innovative use of technology in informal learning by reviewing research on the incorporation of augmented reality (AR) at exhibit-based informal science education (ISE) settings in the literature. We report on the common STEM-focused topics that are covered by current AR applications for ISE learning, as well as the different devices used to support these applications. Additionally, we report on the prevalence of positive learning outcomes and engagement factors commonly associated with the use AR applications in informal environments. This review aims to foster continued development and implementation of AR technology in exhibit-based ISE settings by informing the community of recent findings and promoting additional rigorous research for the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdullah, Z. (2014). Activity theory as analytical tool: a case study of developing student teachers’ creativity in design. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 131, 70–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asai, K., Sugimoto, Y., & Billinghurst, M. (2010). Exhibition of lunar surface navigation system facilitating collaboration between children and parents in science museum. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGGRAPH Conference on Virtual-Reality Continuum and its Applications in Industry 119–124. ACM.

  • Atwood-Blaine, D., & Huffman, D. (2017). Mobile gaming and student interactions in a science center: the future of gaming in science education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(1), 45–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azuma, R. (1997). A survey of augmented reality. Presence Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 6(4), 355–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azuma, R., Baillot, Y., Behringer, R., Feiner, S., Julier, S., & MacIntyre, B. (2001). Recent advances in augmented reality. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 21(6), 34–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bacca, J., Baldiris, S., Fabregat, R., & Graf, S. (2014). Augmented reality trends in education: a systematic review of research and applications. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barkley, J. E., Lepp, A., & Glickman, E. L. (2017). “Pokemon Go!” may promote walking, discourage sedentary behavior in college students. Games Health Journal, 6(3), 165–170. https://doi.org/10.1089/g4h.2017.0009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonanno, P., & Kommers, P. A. (2008). Exploring the influence of gender and gaming competence on attitudes towards using instructional games. Journal of Educational Technology, 39(1), 97–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borun, M., & Dritsas, J. (1997). Developing family-friendly exhibits. Curator: The Museum Journal, 40(3), 178–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, C. A., & Smith, D.(2011). Vision and Change in Undergraduate Biology Education: A Call to Action. Final Report of a National Conference Organised by the AAAS, July 15–17 2009.

  • Broll, W., Lindt, I., Herbst, I., Ohlenburg, J., Braun, A.-K., & Wetzel, R. (2008). Toward next-gen mobile AR games. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 28(4), 40–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, R., et al. (1989). Science and Technology Education for the Elementary Years: Frameworks for Curriculum and Instruction Andover, MA: The National Center for Improving Science Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmigniani, J., & Furht, B. (2011). Augmented reality: an overview. In Handbook of augmented reality (pp. 3–46). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, P., Liu, X., Cheng, W., & Huang, R. (2017). A review of using augmented reality in education from 2011 to 2016. In Innovations in Smart Learning (pp. 13–18). Singapore: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, K.-H., & Tsai, C.-C. (2013). Affordances of augmented reality in science learning: suggestions for future research. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(4), 449–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiu, J. L., DeJaegher, C. J., & Chao, J. (2015). The effects of augmented virtual science laboratories on middle school students’ understanding of gas properties. Computers in Education, 85, 59–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3 ed). California: Sage. Thousand Oaks.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, E. (2014). ‘Not designed for us’: how science museums and science centers socially exclude low-income, minority ethnic groups. Science Education, 98(6), 981–1008. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1993). Die Selbstbestimmungstheorie der Motivation und ihre Bedeutung für die Pädagogik. Zeitschrift fur Padagogik, 39(2), 223–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Motivation, personality, and development within embedded social contexts: An overview of self-determination theory. The Oxford handbook of human motivation (pp. 85-107). Oxford.

  • Derry, S. J., Pea, R. D., Barron, B., Engle, R. A., Erickson, F., Goldman, R., Hall, R., Koschmann, T., Lemke, J. L., Sherin, M. G., & Sherin, B. L. (2010). Conducting video research in the learning sciences: guidance on selection, analysis, technology, and ethics. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(1), 3–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Serio, Á., Ibáñez, M. B., & Kloos, C. D. (2013). Impact of an augmented reality system on students’ motivation for a visual art course. Computers in Education, 68, 586–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Echeverría, A., Améstica, M., Gil, F., Nussbaum, M., Barrios, E., & Leclerc, S. (2012). Exploring different technological platforms for supporting co-located collaborative games in the classroom. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(4), 1170–1177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El Sayed, N. A., Zayed, H. H., & Sharawy, M. I. (2011). ARSC: augmented reality student card. Computers in Education, 56(4), 1045–1061.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falk, J. H., Koran, J. J., & Dierking, L. D. (1986). The things of science: assessing the learning potential of science museums. Science Education, 70(5), 503–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falk, J., Osborne, J., & Dorph, R. (2014). Supporting the implementation of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) through research: Informal science education. Retrieved from https://narst.org/ngsspapers/informal.cfm.

  • Fosnot, C. T., & Perry, R. S. (1996). Constructivism: a psychological theory of learning. Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice, 2, 8–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furió, D., GonzáLez-Gancedo, S., Juan, M.-C., Seguí, I., & Costa, M. (2013). The effects of the size and weight of a mobile device on an educational game. Computers in Education, 64, 24–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goff, E. E., Reindl, K. M., Johnson, C., McClean, P., Offerdahl, E. G., Schroeder, N. L., & White, A. R. (2017a). Efficacy of a meiosis learning module developed for the virtual cell animation collection. CBE Life Sciences Education, 16(1), ar9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goff, E. E., Reindl, K. M., Johnson, C., McClean, P., Offerdahl, E. G., Schroeder, N. L., et al. (2017b). Learning about chemiosmosis and ATP synthesis with animations outside of the classroom. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 18(1), 181115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habig, B., Gupta, P., & Adams, J. (2016). The impact of out of school time informal science education programs on STEM trajectories: a review. Paper presented at the NARST, Baltimore, MD

  • Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: maximizing impact on learning. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirose, M. (2015). Virtual reality technology and museum exhibit. International Journal of Virtual Reality (IJVR), 5(2), 31–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsi, S. (2003). A study of user experiences mediated by nomadic web content in a museum. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(3), 308–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsiao, H.-S., Chang, C.-S., Lin, C.-Y., & Wang, Y.-Z. (2016). Weather observers: a manipulative augmented reality system for weather simulations at home, in the classroom, and at a museum. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(1), 205–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2013.834829.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, T.-C., Chen, C.-C., & Chou, Y.-W. (2016). Animating eco-education: to see, feel, and discover in an augmented reality-based experiential learning environment. Computers in Education, 96, 72–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, E. A., & Lister, T. J. P. (2016). Evaluating indicator-based methods of ‘measuring long-term impacts of a science center on its community’. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(1), 60–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, L. F., & Witchey, H. (2011). The 2010 horizon report: museum edition. Curator: The Museum Journal, 54(1), 37–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamarainen, A. M., Metcalf, S., Grotzer, T., Browne, A., Mazzuca, D., Tutwiler, M. S., & Dede, C. (2013). EcoMOBILE: integrating augmented reality and probeware with environmental education field trips. Computers in Education, 68, 545–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kearsley, G., & Shneiderman, B. (1998). Engagement theory: a framework for technology-based teaching and learning. Educational Technology, 38(5), 20–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitalong, K. S., Moody, J. E., Middlebrook, R. H., & Ancheta, G. S. (2009). Beyond the screen: narrative mapping as a tool for evaluating a mixed-reality science museum exhibit. Technical Communication Quarterly, 18(2), 142–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klopfer, E., & Squire, K. (2008). Environmental detectives—the development of an augmented reality platform for environmental simulations. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(2), 203–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9037-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klopfer, E., Perry, J., Squire, K., Jan, M. F., & Steinkuehler, C. (2005). Mystery at the museum: a collaborative game for museum education. In Proceedings of th 2005 conference on Computer support for collaborative learning: learning 2005: the next 10 years! (pp. 316-320). International Society of the Learning Sciences.

  • Kolb, D. A. (1981). Experiential learning theory and the learning style inventory: a reply to Freedman and Stumpf. Academy of Management Review, 6(2), 289–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koutromanos, G., Sofos, A., & Avraamidou, L. (2015). The use of augmented reality games in education: a review of the literature. Educational Media International, 52(4), 253–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lazzaro, N. (2004). Why we play games: four keys to more emotion without story. XEO Design Inc., Technical Report.

  • Luke, J. 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(2), 123–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matuk, C. (2016). The learning affordances of augmented reality for museum exhibits on human health. Museums & Social Issues, 11(1), 73–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2005). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Milgram, P., Takemura, H., Utsumi, A., & Kishino, F. (1995). Augmented reality: A class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum. In Telemanipulator and telepresence technologies (Vol. 2351, pp. 282-293). International Society for Optics and Photonics.

  • Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: the role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Education & Psychology, 91(2), 358–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulvey, K. L., Miller, B., & Rizzardi, V. (2017). Gender and engineering aptitude: is the color of STEM materials related to children’s performance? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 160, 119–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.03.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nardi, B., & Harris, J. (2006). Strangers and friends: Collaborative play in World of Warcraft. In Proceedings of the 2006 20th anniversary conference on Computer supported cooperative work (pp. 149-158). ACM.

  • National Research Council. (2009). Learning science in informal environments: people, places, and pursuits. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, S., & Riordan, D. G. (2012). Engage to excel: producing one million additional college graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Report to the President. Washington, DC: President’s Council of Advistors on Science and Technolgy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pence, H. E. (2010). Smartphones, smart objects, and augmented reality. The Reference Librarian, 52(1–2), 136–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radu, I. (2014). Augmented reality in education: a meta-review and cross-media analysis. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 18(6), 1533–1543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raven, J. (2000). The Raven’s progressive matrices: change and stability over culture and time. Cognitive Psychology, 41(1), 1–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raven, J. (2003). Raven progressive matrices. In Handbook of nonverbal assessment (pp. 223–237). Boston, MA: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rennie, L. J., Feher, E., Dierking, L. D., & Falk, J. H. (2003). Toward an agenda for advancing research on science learning in out-of-school settings. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(2), 112–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Connell, J. P. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and internalization: examining reasons for acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(5), 749–761.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salmi, H. (1993). Science Centre Education. Motivation and Learning in Informal Education. Research Report 119. Department of Techer Education, PO Box 38 (Ratakatu 6A) 00014 University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.

  • Salmi, H. (2012). Bridging the gap between formal education and informal learning via science centre pedagogy. Paper presented at the International AEMASE Conference on Science Education.

  • Salmi, H., Sotiriou, S., & Bogner, F. (2009). Visualising the Invisible in Science Centres and Science Museums: Augmented Reality (AR) Technology. Web-Based Learning Solutions for Communities of Practice: Developing Virtual Environments for Social and Pedagogical Advancement: Developing Virtual Environments for Social and Pedagogical Advancement, 185.

  • Salmi, H., Kaasinen, A., & Kallunki, V. (2012). Towards an open learning environment via augmented reality (AR): Visualising the invisible in science centres and schools for teacher education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 45, 284–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salmi, H., Thuneberg, H., & Vainikainen, M.-P. (2016). Making the invisible observable by augmented reality in informal science education context. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 7, 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santana, S. (2017). Pocket Bats! http://faculty.washington.edu/ssantana/wordpress/pocket-bats/. Accessed October 26 2017.

  • Schwan, S., Grajal, A., & Lewalter, D. (2014). Understanding and engagement in places of science experience: science museums, science centers, zoos, and aquariums. Educational Psychologist, 49(2), 70–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.917588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, S., & Elinich, K. (2010). Augmented reality for interpretive and experiential learning. In EVA (Vol. 10, pp. 87-92).

  • Sommerauer, P., & Müller, O. (2014). Augmented reality in informal learning environments: a field experiment in a mathematics exhibition. Computers in Education, 79, 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.07.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sotiriou, S., & Bogner, F. X. (2008). Visualizing the invisible: augmented reality as an innovative science education scheme. Advanced Science Letters, 1(1), 114–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Squire, K., & Klopfer, E. (2007). Augmented reality simulations on handheld computers. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(3), 371–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staus, N. L., & Falk, J. H. (2017). The role of emotion in informal science learning: testing an exploratory model. Mind, Brain, and Education, 11(2), 45–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sung, H.-Y., & Hwang, G.-J. (2013). A collaborative game-based learning approach to improving students’ learning performance in science courses. Computers in Education, 63, 43–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takahashi, T. B., Takahashi, S., Kusunoki, F., Terano, T., & Inagaki, S. (2013). Making a hands-on display with augmented reality work at a science museum. In Signal-Image Technology & Internet-Based Systems (SITIS), 2013 International Conference on (pp. 385–390): IEEE.

  • Tateno, M., Skokauskas, N., Kato, T. A., Teo, A. R., & Guerrero, A. P. (2016). New game software (Pokémon Go) may help youth with severe social withdrawal, hikikomori. Psychiatry Research, 246, 848–849.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tofield, S., Coll, R. K., Vyle, B., & Bolstad, R. (2003). Zoos as a source of free choice learning. Research in Science & Technological Education, 21(1), 67–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140308342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vincenzi, D. A., Valimont, B., Macchiarella, N., Opalenik, C., Gangadharan, S. N., & Majoros, A. E. (2003). The effectiveness of cognitive elaboration using augmented reality as a training and learning paradigm. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 47, pp. 2054–2058, Vol. 19). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wojciechowski, R., & Cellary, W. (2013). Evaluation of learners’ attitude toward learning in ARIES augmented reality environments. Computers in Education, 68, 570–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wojciechowski, R., Walczak, K., & White, M. (2003). Augmented reality interface for museum artifact visualization. In IASTED International Conference on Visualization, Imaging and Image Processing VIIP (pp. 998-1004).

  • Woodruff, A., Aoki, P. M., Hurst, A., & Szymanski, M. H. (2001). Electronic guidebooks and visitor attention. In ICHIM (1) (pp. 437-454).

  • Yoon, S., & Wang, J. (2014). Making the invisible visible in science museums through augmented reality devices. TechTrends, 58(1), 49–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-013-0720-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, S., Elinich, K., Wang, J., Steinmeier, C., & Tucker, S. (2012). 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, H. T., Land, S. M., McClain, L. R., Mohney, M. R., Choi, G. W., & Salman, F. H. (2015). Tree investigators: supporting families’ scientific talk in an arboretum with mobile computers. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 5(1), 44–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research was conducted with support from the National Science Foundation (Grant No. 1647131).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Education, University of South Carolina, 820 South Main Street, Columbia, SC, 29208, USA

    Eric E. Goff & Matthew J. Irvin

  2. College of Humanities and Social Sciences, North Carolina State University, 208 Poe Hall, Raleigh, NC, 27695, USA

    Kelly Lynn Mulvey

  3. College of Sciences, North Carolina State University, 3229 Broughton Hall, Raleigh, NC, 27695, USA

    Adam Hartstone-Rose

Authors
  1. Eric E. Goff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kelly Lynn Mulvey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Matthew J. Irvin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Adam Hartstone-Rose
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eric E. Goff.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Goff, E.E., Mulvey, K.L., Irvin, M.J. et al. Applications of Augmented Reality in Informal Science Learning Sites: a Review. J Sci Educ Technol 27, 433–447 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9734-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9734-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation