Human factors and qualitative pedagogical evaluation of a mobile augmented reality system for science education used by learners with physical disabilities | Personal and Ubiquitous Computing Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Human factors and qualitative pedagogical evaluation of a mobile augmented reality system for science education used by learners with physical disabilities

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Personal and Ubiquitous Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Technology-enhanced learning, employing novel forms of content representation and education service delivery by enhancing the visual perception of the real environment of the user, is favoured by proponents of educational inclusion for learners with physical disabilities. Such an augmented reality computer-mediated learning system has been developed as part of an EU funded research project, namely the CONNECT project. The CONNECT project brings together schools and science centres, and produces novel information and communication technologies based on augmented reality (AR) and web-based streaming and communication, in order to support learning in a variety of settings. The CONNECT AR interactive learning environment can assist users to better contextualize and reinforce their learning in school and in other settings where people learn (i.e. science centres and home). The CONNECT concept and associated technologies encourage users to visit science centres and perform experiments that are not possible in school. They can also build on these experiences back at school and at home with visual augmentations that they are communicated through web-based streaming technology. This paper particularly focuses on a user-centred evaluation approach of human factors and pedagogical aspects of the CONNECT system, as applied to a special needs user group. The main focus of the paper is on highlighting the human factors issues and challenges, in terms of wearability and technology acceptance, while elaborating on some qualitative aspects of the pedagogical effectiveness of the instructional medium that AR technology offers for this group of learners.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Notes

  1. Designing the classroom of tomorrow by using advanced technologies to connect formal and informal learning environments.

References

  1. Tang S-L, Kwoh C-K, Teo M-Y, Sing NW, Ling KV (1998) Augmented reality systems for medical applications. IEEE Mag Engineering in Med Biol 17(3):49–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kaufmann H, Schmalstieg D (2003) Mathematics and geometry education with collaborative augmented reality. Comput Graph 27(3):339–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Starner T, Mann S, Rhodes B, Levine J, Healey J, Kirsch D, Picard R, Pentland A (1997) Augmented reality through wearable computing. Presence 6:386–398

    Google Scholar 

  4. Feiner S, MacIntyre B, Haupt M, Solomon E (1993) Windows on the world: 2D windows for 3D augmented reality. In: Proceedings of the 6th annual ACM symposium on user interface software and technology (Atlanta, Georgia, United States). UIST ‘93. ACM Press, New York, 145–155

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Sotiriou S, Anastopoulou S, Rosenfeld S, Aharoni O, Hofstein A, Bogner F, Sturm H, Hoeksema K (2006) Visualizing the invisible: the CONNECT approach for teaching science. In: The 6th IEEE international conference on advanced learning technologies (ICALT 2006), Kerkrade, The Netherlands, 5–7 July 2006

  6. Bialo ER, Sivin-Kachala J (1996) The effectiveness of technology in schools: a summary of recent research. Sch Libr Media Q 25(1):51–57

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brown DJ, Kerr S, Wilson JR (1997) Virtual environments in special-needs education. Commun. ACM 40(8):72–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hill JR, HwaKoh M, Singleton ES, Song L (2004) Improving online learning: student perceptions of useful and challenging characteristics. Internet High Educ 7:59–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Knight JF, Baber C (2004) Neck muscle activity and perceived pain and discomfort due to variations of head load and posture, Aviat Space Environ Med 75:123–131

    Google Scholar 

  10. Knight JF, Baber C (2007) Assessing the physical loading of wearable computers. Appl Ergon (in press)

  11. Knight JF, Baber CA (2005) tool to assess the comfort of wearable computers, Hum Factors 47(1):77–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Knight JF, Schwirtz A, Psomadelis F, Baber C, Bristow HW, Arvanitis TN (2005) The design of the SensVest. Personal Ubiquitous Comput 9:6–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Knight JF, Williams DD, Arvanitis TN, Baber C, Sotiriou S, Anastopoulou S, Gargalakos M (2006). Assessing the wearability of wearable computers. In: Proceedings of the 10th international symposium on wearable computers – ISWC2006, IEEE, Montreaux, Switzerland, pp.75–82

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the European Community under the Information Society Technologies (IST) programme of the 6th FP for RTD-Project CONNECT contract number IST-507844 for supporting the project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Electronic, Electrical and Computer Engineering, School of Engineering, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK

    Theodoros N. Arvanitis & James F. Knight

  2. Department of Pre-School Education and Educational Design, School of Humanities, University of the Aegean, Rhodes, Greece

    Argeroula Petrou

  3. R&D Department, Ellinogermaniki Agogi, Dimitriou Panagea St., Pallini Attikis, Athens, 153 51, Greece

    Stavros Savas & Sofoklis Sotiriou

  4. Institute of Communication and Computer Systems, National Technical University of Athens, 9, Irron Politechniou str, Zografou, Athens, 157 73, Greece

    Michael Gargalakos & Elpida Gialouri

Authors
  1. Theodoros N. Arvanitis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Argeroula Petrou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. James F. Knight
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stavros Savas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sofoklis Sotiriou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Michael Gargalakos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Elpida Gialouri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Theodoros N. Arvanitis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Arvanitis, T.N., Petrou, A., Knight, J.F. et al. Human factors and qualitative pedagogical evaluation of a mobile augmented reality system for science education used by learners with physical disabilities. Pers Ubiquit Comput 13, 243–250 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-007-0187-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-007-0187-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation