Encyclopedia of Educational Innovation

Living Edition
| Editors: Michael A. Peters, Richard Heraud

Augmented Reality in STEAM Education

  • Maria Meletiou-MavrotherisEmail author
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2262-4_128-1


The advent of new and emerging technologies and industries has highlighted a future skills gap and the need to equip the young generation with a new skill set in order for them to cope with the demands of modern society. It has led to a paradigm shift from traditional education philosophy toward innovative approaches aimed at cultivating human resources equipped with the knowledge and skills required to meet the needs of the digital era. This shift has fuelled the growth of STEAM education, an integrated approach to the teaching of the different disciplines. STEAM is an acronym for the study of Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics. It was developed on the basis of STEM, a transdisciplinary approach that overcame the strict individual borders of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics by treating sciences as a single whole. Arts was recently added to the original STEM framework in order to promote learning in more connected and holistic ways....

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


  1. Azuma, R. T. (1997). A survey of augmented reality. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 6(4), 355–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bazler, J., & Van Sickle, M. L. (2017). Cases on STEAM education in practice. Hershey: IGI Global.  https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-2334-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Birt, J., & Cowling, M. A. (2017). Towards future mixed reality learning spaces for STEAM education. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 25(4), 1–16.Google Scholar
  4. Chen, P., Liu, X., Cheng, W., & Huang, R. (2017). A review of using augmented reality in education from 2011 to 2016. In E. Popescu et al. (Eds.), Innovations in smart learning. Lecture notes in educational technology. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Johnson, L., Levine, A., Smith, R., & Stone, S. (2010). The 2010 horizon report. Austin: The New Media Consortium.Google Scholar
  8. Katzis, K., Dimopooulos, C., Meletiou-Mavrotheris, M., & Lasica, I. E. (2018). Engineering attractiveness in the European Educational Environment: Can distance education. Approaches make a difference? Education Sciences, 8(1). Available Online:  https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8010016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mavrotheris, E., Lasica, I. E., Pitsikalis, S. & Meletiou-Mavrotheris M. (2018). Project EL-STEM: Enlivened laboratories within STEM education. In INTED2018 proceedings (pp. 9099–9107). Valencia: IATED.Google Scholar
  10. Milgram, P., & Kishino, F. (1994). A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems, 77(12), 1321–1329.Google Scholar
  11. Yuen, S., Yaoyuneyong, G., & Johnson, E. (2011). Augmented reality: An overview and five directions for AR in education. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange, 4(1), 119–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.European University CyprusNicosiaCyprus

Section editors and affiliations

  • David Parsons
    • 1
  1. 1.The Mind LabAucklandNew Zealand