Skip to main content

Collaborative Augmented Reality in Engineering Education

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Cyber-physical Systems and Digital Twins (REV2019 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems ((LNNS,volume 80))

Abstract

A continuous trend in education is the use of new technologies like Augmented Reality (AR). These technologies are assumed to make teaching and learning processes more hands-on and more tangible, particularly in terms of abstract learning contents. Due to this practical nature, AR is assumed to foster the motivation of concerning oneself with a specific learning content and supports, thus, the comprehension of it and its purpose for e.g. the future work life. In academic learning contexts such as engineering education, however, AR can also be used for collaborative purposes despite its currently most common purpose of demonstration and instruction. The present paper investigates the effects of using AR in collaborative team processes with special respect to motivation and emotional activation. A mixed methods approach is chosen in order to examine qualitative and quantitative data to gather both a subjective and an objective perspective on the subject of research. As the investigation shows, the motivation to use this technology is high which derives, amongst other factors, from the better comprehension of the learning content when compared to the results of the control group.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 229.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In order to display virtual objects and/or additional information, the object-based tracking uses real-world objects as triggers for displaying the virtual ones by predefining them in the AR-application [5]. Markerless tracking, in contrast, scans the real-world environment and detects e.g. “locations of walls or points of intersection, allowing users to place virtual objects without needing to read an image” [5]. Markerless tracking is used e.g. by the Microsoft HoloLens.

  2. 2.

    Marker tracking is a common approach that does not require many performance resources in terms of computing power in smartphones and tablets, for instance. It is realised by scanning an AR marker with the back camera of the respective device. An AR marker is a visual trigger that cause the display of virtual objects or additional information [6], e.g. a picture or QR-code. With the help of markers, it is defined where to locate and place virtual objects in the right place in the scene. Recognising predefined markers in the scene is achievable on a vast spectrum of devices [7], since even devices with a lower computing power can detect markers and show virtual objects respectively.

References

  1. Kaufmann, H., Steinbügl, K., Dünser, A., Glück, J.: General training of spatial abilities by geometry education in augmented reality. Ann. Rev. CyberTherapy Telemedicine 3, 65–76 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Schnier, C., Pitsch, K., Dierker, A., Hermann, T.: Collaboration in augmented reality: how to establish coordination and joint attention? In: Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (ECSCW2011), pp. 405–416. Springer, London (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Lee, J.-H., Mraz, R., Zakzanis, K.K., Black, S.E., Snyder, P.J., Kim, S.I., Graham, S.J.: Spatial ability and navigation learning in a virtual city. Ann. Rev. CyberTherapy Telemedicine 3, 151–158 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Schmalstieg, D., Hollerer, T.: Augmented Reality: Principles and Practice. Addison-Wesley Professional, Boston (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  5. https://www.marxentlabs.com/what-is-markerless-augmented-reality-dead-reckoning/

  6. https://anymotion.com/wissensgrundlagen/augmented-reality-marker

  7. Koch, C., Neges, M., König, M., Abramovici, M.: Natural markers for augmented reality-based indoor navigation and facility management. Autom. Constr. 48, 18–30 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. FitzGerald, E., Adams, A., Ferguson, R., Gaved, M., Mor, Y., Thomas, R.: Augmented reality and mobile learning: the state of the art. In: 11th World Conference on Mobile and Contextual Learning (mLearn 2012), 16–18 Oct 2012, Helsinki, Finland (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Radu, J.: Augmented reality in education: a meta-review and cross-media analysis. Pers. Ubiquituous Comput. 18(6), 1533–1543 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dunleavy, M., Dede, C.: Augmented reality teaching and learning. In: Spector, J., Merrill, M., Elen, J., Bishop, M. (eds.) Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, pp. 735–745. Springer, New York (2014)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Wu, H.-K., Lee, S., Chang, H.-Y., Liang, J.-C.: Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education. Comput. Educ. 62, 41–49 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Goodhue, D.L., Thompson, R.L.: Task-technology fit and individual performance. MIS Q. 19(2), 213–236 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Venkatesh, V., Bala, H.: Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decis. Sci. 39(2), 273–315 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Russel, J.A., Weiss, A., Mendelsohn, G.A.: Affect grid: a single-item scale of pleasure and arousal. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 57(3), 493–502 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Beier, G.: Kontrollüberzeugungen im Umgang mit Technik: ein Persönlichkeitsmerkmal mit Relevanz für die Gestaltung technischer Systeme (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lefcourt, H.M.: Locus of control. In: Robinson, J.P., Shaver, P.R., Wrightsman, L.S. (eds.) Measures of Social Psychological Attitudes, Vol. 1. Measures of Personality and Social Psychological Attitudes, pp. 413–499. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, US (1991)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is part of the project “Excellent Teaching and Learning in Engineering Sciences” (ELLI 2) and was funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), Germany.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nina Schiffeler .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Schiffeler, N., Stehling, V., Haberstroh, M., Isenhardt, I. (2020). Collaborative Augmented Reality in Engineering Education. In: Auer, M., Ram B., K. (eds) Cyber-physical Systems and Digital Twins. REV2019 2019. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 80. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23162-0_65

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics