A psychological perspective on augmented reality in the mathematics classroom

Computers and Education

Volumn 68, Issue , 2013, Pages 536-544

  Bujak, Keith R ^a   Radu, Iulian ^b   Catrambone, Richard ^a   MacIntyre, Blair ^b   Zheng, Ruby ^b,d   Golubski, Gary ^c  

^a GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b Georgia Institute of Technology   (United States)

^c U S ARMY   (United States)

^d NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

Applications in subject areas; Augmented reality; Cognition; Human centered design; Interactive learning environments

Indexed keywords

AUGMENTED REALITY; SCAFFOLDS; TEACHING;

APPLICATIONS IN SUBJECT AREAS; COGNITION; COGNITIVE DIMENSIONS; COLLABORATIVE LEARNING; CONTEXTUAL DIMENSIONS; HUMAN-CENTERED DESIGNS; INTERACTIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT; LEARNING EXPERIENCES;

COMPUTER AIDED INSTRUCTION;

EID: 84884910075     PISSN: 03601315     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.017     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Abrahamson, D., & Trninic, D. (2011). Toward an embodied-interaction design framework for mathematical concepts. Proceedings of the 10th annual interaction design and children conference (pp. 1-10).
2. Agarwal, G., Belhumeur, P., & Feiner, S. (2006). First steps toward an electronic field guide for plants. Taxon, 55(3), 597-610. (Pubitemid 44534836)
3. Antle, A. N., Droumeva, M., & Corness, G. (2008). Playing with the sound maker. In Proceedings of the 7th international conference on interaction design and children (pp. 178-185). New York, NY, USA: ACM Press.
4. Antle, A. N., Droumeva, M., & Ha, D. (2009). Hands on what?: comparing children's mouse-based and tangible-based interaction. In Proceedings of the 8th international conference on interaction design and children (pp. 80-88). New York, NY, USA: ACM Press.
5. Azuma, R. T. (1997). A survey of augmented reality. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 6(4), 355-385.
6. Azuma, R. T., Baillot, Y., Behringer, R., Feiner, S., Julier, S., & MacIntyre, B. (2001). Recent advances in augmented reality. Computer Graphics and Applications, 21(6), 34-47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/38.963459. (Pubitemid 33048164)
7. Billinghurst, M., Kato, H., & Poupyrev, I. (2001). The MagicBook: moving seamlessly between reality and virtuality. IEEE Computer Graphics & Applications, 21(3), 6-8. (Pubitemid 32450608)
8. Bizer, C., Heath, T., & Berners-Lee, T. (2009). Linked data-the story so far. International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems, 5(3), 1-22.
9. Boggan, M., Harper, S., & Whitmire, A. (2010). Using manipulatives to teach elementary mathematics. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 3, 1-6.
10. Bransford, J. D., and Brown., A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (Expanded Edition). Washington, D.C.: National Research Council.
11. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
12. Brown, M. C., and McNeil., M. N., & Glenberg, A. M. (2009). Using concreteness in education: real problems, potential solutions. Child Development Perspectives, 3(3), 160-164.
13. Campos, P., & Pessanha, S. (2011). Designing augmented reality tangible interfaces for Kindergarten children. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 6773, 12-19.
14. Chen, C., and Su., C. C., Lee, P., & Wu, F. (2007). Augmented interface for children Chinese learning. In Proceedings of the 7th IEEE international conference on advanced learning technologies (pp. 268-270). Washington, DC, USA: IEEE Computer Society Press.
15. Chi, M. T. H. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: a conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(1), 73-105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01005.x.
16. Davies, J., & Brember, I. (2001). The closing gap in attitudes between boys and girls: a 5-year longitudinal study. Educational Psychology, 21(1), 103-114. (Pubitemid 33219643)
17. Evans, M. A., Feenstra, E., Ryon, E., & McNeill, D. (2011). A multimodal approach to coding discourse: collaboration, distributed cognition, and geometric reasoning. ComputerSupported Collaborative Learning, 6(2), 253-278. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11412-011-9113-0.
18. Flavell, J. H., and Miller., P. H., & Miller, S. A. (1993). Cognitive development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
19. Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). What good are positive emotions? Review of General Psychology, 2(3), 300-319. (Pubitemid 128608317)
20. Ginns, P. (2006). Integrating information: a meta-analysis of the spatial contiguity and temporal contiguity effects. Learning and Instruction, 16(6), 511-525. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.10.001. (Pubitemid 44824820)
21. Glenberg, A. M., and Brown., M. C., & Levin, J. R. (2007). Enhancing comprehension in small reading groups using a manipulation strategy. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(3), 389-399. Retrieved from. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0361476X06000142.
22. Glenn, S., & Carpenter, S. (2007). Patterns in arithmetic: Book 2: Parent/teacher guide. Fallbrook, CA, USA: Pattern Press. p. 260.
23. Hornecker, E., & Dünser, A. (2009). Of pages and paddles: children's expectations and mistaken interactions with physical-digital tools. Interacting with Computers, 21(1-2), 95-107. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom. 2008.10.007.
24. Kaufmann, H., & Schmalstieg, D. (2003). Mathematics and geometry education with collaborative augmented reality. Computers & Graphics, 27(3), 339-345.
25. Kester, L., and Kirschner., P. A., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2005). The split attention effect in computer simulated troubleshooting of electrical circuits. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 71-85.
26. Kiyokawa, K., Iwasa, H., Takemura, H., & Yokoya, N. (1998). Collaborative immersive workspace through a shared augmented environment. Intelligent Systems in Design and Manufacturing, 3517, 2-13. (Pubitemid 35005448)
27. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL, USA: University of Chicago Press. p. 256.
28. Lakoff, G., & Núñez, R. E. (2000). Where mathematics comes from: How the embodied mind brings mathematics into being. New York, New York, USA: Basic Books. p. 512.
29. Moyer, P. S., and Bolyard., J. J., & Spikell, M. A. (2002). What are virtual manipulatives? Teaching Children Mathematics, 8(6), 372-377.
30. Nischelwitzer, A., Lenz, F., Searle, G., & Holzinger, A. (2007). Some aspects of the development of low-cost augmented reality learning environments as examples for future interfaces in technology enhanced learning. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 4556, 728-737.
31. Pasqualotti, A., & dal Sasso Freitas, C. M. (2002). MAT3D: a virtual reality modeling language environment for the teaching and learning of mathematics. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 5(5), 409-422. (Pubitemid 35303981)
32. Pathomaree, N., & Charoenseang, S. (2005). Augmented reality for skill transfer in assembly task. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2005.1513829. IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 500-504. (Pubitemid 44144432)
33. Saitta, E. K. H., and Gittings., M. J., & Geiger, C. (2011). Learning dimensional analysis through collaboratively working with manipulatives. Journal of Chemical Education, 88(7), 910-915.
34. Shelton, B., & Hedley, N. (2004). Exploring a cognitive basis for learning spatial relationships with augmented reality. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 1(4), 323-357.
35. Suh, J., & Moyer, P. S. (2007). Developing students' representational fluency using virtual and physical algebra balances. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 26(2), 155.
36. Swan, P., & Marshall, L. (2010). Revisiting mathematics manipulative materials. Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 15(2), 13-19.
37. Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 123-138. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5.
38. Tang, A., Owen, C., Biocca, F., & Mou, W. (2003). Comparative effectiveness of augmented reality in object assembly. Proceedings of the conference on Human factors in computing systems. p. 73. New York, New York, USA: ACM Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/642625.642626.
39. Teo, T., & Noyes, J. (2008). Development and validation of a computer attitude measure for young students (CAMYS). Computers in Human Behavior, 24(6), 2659-2667.
40. Theng, Y., Mei-Ling, C. L., Liu, W., & Cheok, A. D. (2007). Mixed reality systems for learning: a pilot study understanding user perceptions and acceptance. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 4563, 728-737.
41. Tversky, B. (2001). Spatial schemas in depictions. In M. Gattis (Ed.), Spatial schemas and Abstract thought (pp. 79-111). Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
42. Utah State University. (1999a). Base blocks. NLVM. Retrieved 05.05.11, from. http://nlvm.usu.edu/en/nav/frames-asid-152-g-1-t-1.html.
43. Utah State University. (1999b). Platonic solids - Slicing. NLVM. Retrieved 05.04.11, from. http://nlvm.usu.edu/en/nav/frames-asid-126-g-4-t-3. html.
44. Uttal, D. H., Scudder Judy, S., & Kathyrn, V. (1997). Manipulatives as symbols: a new perspective on the use of concrete objects to teach mathematics. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 18(1), 37-54. (Pubitemid 127172292)
45. Wikitude. (2011). Wikitude. Retrieved 26.12.11, from. http://www.wikitude.com/en/.
46. Yates, F. A. (1966). The art of memory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
47. Yelp Inc. (2011). Yelp. Retrieved 26.12.11, from http://www.yelp.com/.