Universal Access in the Information Society

, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp 315–325 | Cite as

Effects of gender and different augmented reality learning systems on English vocabulary learning of elementary school students

  • Ting-Chia HsuEmail author
Long Paper


This study developed and compared two augmented reality learning systems for third-grade students to learn English vocabulary in situated surroundings. One system was developed based on a collective game-based (CGB) design, in which the students had to collect all seven reality targets without being restricted as to which they could start from. The other system was developed based on a sequential-mission gaming (SMG) design, which provided the students with seven stages to complete in sequence. The effects of gender and system on the students’ flow experience, cognitive load, and learning effectiveness were assessed. The results indicated that the students using the two systems had similarly high learning effectiveness. However, those using the CGB system revealed higher flow experience and lower intrinsic cognitive loads in comparison with those using the SMG system. The male students had high flow experience in both systems; however, the flow experience of the females in the CGB system outperformed that of the females in the SMG system.


Augmented reality Game-based learning Cognitive load Flow experience Gender 



This study is supported in part by the Ministry of Science and Technology in Taiwan under Contract Numbers: MOST 103-2628-S-003-003-MY2 and MOST 105-2628-S-003-002-MY3.


  1. 1.
    Al-Fahad, F.N.: Students’ attitudes and perceptions towards the effectiveness of mobile learning in King Saud University, Saudi Arabia. Online Submiss 8(2), 1–9 (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anderson, J.R., Reder, L.M., Simon, H.A.: Situated learning and education. Educ. Res. 25(4), 5–11 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Azuma, R.T.: A survey of augmented reality. Presence 6(4), 355–385 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Balog, A., Pribeanu, C., Iordache, D.: Augmented reality in schools: preliminary evaluation results from a summer school. Int. J. Soc. Sci. 2(3), 163–166 (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barzilai, S., Blau, I.: Scaffolding game-based learning: Impact on learning achievements, perceived learning, and game experiences. Comput. Educ. 70, 65–79 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bressler, D.M.: Is it all in the game? Flow experience and scientific practices during an INPLACE mobile game. Dissertation, Lehigh University (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chang, K.E., Wu, L.J., Weng, S.E., Sung, Y.T.: Embedding game-based problem-solving phase into problem-posing system for mathematics learning. Comput. Educ. 58(2), 775–786 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chee, Y.S., Tan, K.C.D., Tan, E.M., Jan, M.F.: Learning chemistry performatively: epistemological and pedagogical bases of design-for-learning with computer and video games. In: Tan, K.C.D., Kim, M. (eds.) Issues and Challenges in Science Education Research, pp. 245–262. Springer, Netherlands (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen, J., Kinshuk, J.: Mobile technology in educational services. J. Educ. Multimed. Hypermedia 14(1), 91–109 (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chen, C.M., Tsai, Y.N.: Interactive augmented reality system for enhancing library instruction in elementary schools. Comput. Educ. 59(2), 638–652 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cheng, T.S., Lu, Y.C., Yang, C.S.: Using the multi-display teaching system to lower cognitive load. J. Educ. Technol. Soc. 18(4), 128–140 (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chien, Y.T., Chang, C.Y.: Comparison of different instructional multimedia designs for improving student science-process skill learning. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 21(1), 106–113 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Clark, D.B., Martinez-Garza, M.: 18 Prediction and explanation as design mechanics in conceptually integrated digital games to help players articulate the tacit understandings they build through game play. In: Steinkuehler, C., Squire, K., Barab, S. (eds.) Games, Learning, and Society: Learning and Meaning in the Digital age, pp. 279–305. Cambridge University Press, London (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Corkill, A.J.: Advance organizers: facilitators of recall. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 4(1), 33–67 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Csikszentmihalyi, M.: Beyond Anxiety and Boredom: The Experience of Play in Work and Games. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (1975)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Erhel, S., Jamet, E.: Digital game-based learning: impact of instructions and feedback on motivation and learning effectiveness. Comput. Educ. 67, 156–167 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Echeverría, A., Améstica, M., Gil, F., Nussbaum, M., Barrios, E., Leclerc, S.: Exploring different technological platforms for supporting co-located collaborative games in the classroom. Comput. Hum. Behav. 28(4), 1170–1177 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gibson, D., Aldrich, C., Prensky, M.: Games and Simulations in Online Learning: Research and Development. Covent Garden, London (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Golonka, E.M., Bowles, A.R., Frank, V.M., Richardson, D.L., Freynik, S.: Technologies for foreign language learning: a review of technology types and their effectiveness. Comput. Assist. Lang. Learn. 27(1), 70–105 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Habgood, M.J., Ainsworth, S.E.: Motivating children to learn effectively: exploring the value of intrinsic integration in educational games. J. Learn. Sci. 20(2), 169–206 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hsieh, Y.H., Lin, Y.C., Hou, H.T.: Exploring elementary-school students’ engagement patterns in a game-based learning environment. J. Educ. Technol. Soc. 18(2), 336–348 (2015)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ho, P.C., Chung, S.M., Lin, Y.H.: Influences on children’s visual cognition capabilities through playing’ intelligent matrix’ developed by the augmented virtual reality technology. Int. J. Humanit. Arts Comput. 6(1–2), 160–171 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hogle, J.G.: Considering games as cognitive tools: in search of effective edutainment. Dissertation, University of Georgia (1996)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hou, H.T., Li, M.C.: Evaluating multiple aspects of a digital educational problem-solving-based adventure game. Comput. Hum. Behav. 30, 29–38 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Huyen, N.T.T., Nga, K.T.T.: Learning vocabulary through games. Asian EFL J. 5(4), 90–105 (2003)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hwang, G.J., Chiu, L.Y., Chen, C.H.: A contextual game-based learning approach to improving students’ inquiry-based learning performance in social studies courses. Comput. Educ. 81, 13–25 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hwang, G.J., Yang, L.H., Wang, S.Y.: A concept map-embedded educational computer game for improving students’ learning performance in natural science courses. Comput. Educ. 69, 121–130 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ke, F., Abras, T.: Games for engaged learning of middle school children with special learning needs. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 44(2), 225–242 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kesim, M., Ozarslan, Y.: Augmented reality in education: current technologies and the potential for education. Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci. 47, 297–302 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kiili, K., de Freitas, S., Arnab, S., Lainema, T.: The design principles for flow experience in educational games. Proc. Comput. Sci. 15, 78–91 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kutulakos, K.N., Vallino, J.R.: Calibration-free augmented reality. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 4(1), 1–20 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Liu, T.Y., Chu, Y.L.: Using ubiquitous games in an English listening and speaking course: Impact on learning outcomes and motivation. Comput. Educ. 55(2), 630–643 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mayer, R.E.: Can advance organizers influence meaningful learning? Rev. Educ. Res. 49, 371–383 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    McLean, J.E., Ernest, J.M.: The role of statistical significance testing in educational research. Res. Schools 5(2), 15–22 (1998)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Milgram, P., Kishino, F.: A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst. 77(12), 1321–1329 (1994)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mueller, J.L., Wood, E., De Pasquale, D., Cruikshank, R.: Examining mobile technology in higher education: handheld devices in and out of the classroom. Int. J. Higher Educ. 1(2), 43–54 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Oxford, R.L., Ehrman, M.E.: Adults’ language learning strategies in an intensive foreign language program in the United States. System 23(3), 359–386 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Paas, F.G.: Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: a cognitive-load approach. J. Educ. Psychol. 84(4), 429 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Paas, F., Renkl, A., Sweller, J.: Cognitive load theory: instructional implications of the interaction between information structures and cognitive architecture. Inst. Sci. 32(1), 1–8 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Papastergiou, M.: Digital game-based learning in high school computer science education: impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Comput. Educ. 52(1), 1–12 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Parnafes, O., Disessa, A.: Relations between types of reasoning and computational representations. Int. J. Comput. Math. Learn. 9(3), 251–280 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Quintana, C., Reiser, B.J., Davis, E.A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R.G., Kyza, E., Edelson, D., Soloway, E.: A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. J. Learn. Sci. 13(3), 337–386 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Rittschof, K.A.: Field dependence–independence as visuospatial and executive functioning in working memory: implications for instructional systems design and research. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 58(1), 99–114 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Robertson, J.: Making games in the classroom: benefits and gender concerns. Comput. Educ. 59(2), 385–398 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Shi, Y.R., Shih, J.L.: Game factors and game-based learning design model. Int. J. Comput. Games Technol. 2015, 1–11 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J.J., Paas, F.G.: Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 10(3), 251–296 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Van Eck, R.: Digital game-based learning: it’s not just the digital natives who are restless. Educ. Rev. 41(2), 16 (2006)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Voyer, D., Voyer, S., Bryden, M.P.: Magnitude of sex differences in spatial abilities: a meta-analysis and consideration of critical variables. Psychol. Bull. 117(2), 250 (1995)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Wiebe, E.N., Lamb, A., Hardy, M., Sharek, D.: Measuring engagement in video game-based environments: Investigation of the user engagement scale. Comput. Hum. Behav. 32, 123–132 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Wiberg, H., Nilsson, E., Lindén, P., Svanberg, B., Poom, L.: Physiological responses related to moderate mental load during car driving in field conditions. Biol. Psychol. 108, 115–125 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Wu, H.K., Lee, S.W.Y., Chang, H.Y., Liang, J.C.: Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education. Comput. Educ. 62, 41–49 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Zhang, J., Sung, Y.T., Hou, H.T., Chang, K.E.: The development and evaluation of an augmented reality-based armillary sphere for astronomical observation instruction. Comput. Educ. 73, 178–188 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Technology Application and Human Resource DevelopmentNational Taiwan Normal UniversityTaipeiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations