Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A systematic literature review of mixed reality environments in K-12 education

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Various studies have widely utilized mixed reality (MR) in primary and secondary (K-12) education. Nevertheless, there has been relatively no explicit focus on a substantial amount of studies that are reviewed systematically in order to present and suggest the educational benefits of MR technology for the development of learning environments. The present systematic literature review describes the current state of knowledge and practices using MR in K-12 education and provides guidance for educators and scholars focusing on instructional design contexts by critically appraising and summarizing the existing research. It also outlines a wide range of results yielded by quantitative, qualitative and mixed-method studies to investigate potential benefits, difficulties, and effectiveness of MR environments across various learning subjects. Overall, 21 studies published from 2002 until 2018 in 18 international peer-reviewed journals were analysed, with 11 and 10 studies regarding primary and secondary education, respectively. This review informs educators and scholars about insights and evidence gained by prior findings on the current state-of-the-art research so that provide a contribution of scientific knowledge and innovation using MR environments in different learning subjects. Implications for practice and research are discussed in detail, as MR has the potential to influence students’ engagement, participation, skill acquisition, and embodied learning experience for knowledge transfer within well-structured instructional design contexts.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bayon, V., Wilson, R., Stanton, D., & Boltman, A. (2003). Mixed reality storytelling environments. Virtual Reality, 7(1), 54–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benford, S., Greenhalgh, C., Reynard, G., Brown, C., & Koleva, B. (1998). Understanding and constructing shared spaces with mixed-reality boundaries. ACM Transaction Computers Human Interaction, 5(3), 185–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birchfield, D., & Megowan-Romanowicz, C. (2009). Earth science learning in SMALLab: A design experiment for mixed-reality. Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(4), 403–421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boutellier, S., Gassmann, O. & Raeder, S. (2011). What is the difference between social and natural sciences? Retrieved 20 September 2018 from https://www.collier.sts.vt.edu/sciwrite/pdfs/boutellier_2011.pdf

  • Chang, C.-W., Lee, J.-H., Wang, C.-Y., & Chen, G.-D. (2010). Improving the authentic learning experience by integrating robots into the mixed-reality environment. Computers and Education, 55(4), 1572–1578.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chao, J., Chiu, J. L., DeJaegher, C. J., & Pan, E. A. (2016). Sensor-augmented virtual labs: Using physical interactions with science simulations to promote understanding of gas behavior. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(1), 16–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, S., & Duh, H. (2018). The interface of mixed reality: From the past to the future. CCF Transactions on Pervasive Computing and Interaction., 1, 69–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42486-018-0002-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Lima, E., Feijo, E., Barbosa, S., Furtado, S., Ciarlini, A., & Pozzer, C. (2014). Draw your own story: Paper and pencil interactive storytelling. Entertainment Computing, 5(1), 33–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Du, R., Li, D & Varshney, A. (2019). Geollery: A mixed reality social media platform. In proceedings of the 2019 conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI), CHI, p. 13. ACM, May. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300915.

  • Enyedy, N., Danish, J. A., & DeLiema, D. (2015). Constructing liminal blends in a collaborative augmented-reality learning environment. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 10(1), 7–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauch, H. (2003). Scientific method in practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Han, J., Jo, M., Hyun, E., & So, H. J. (2015). Examining young children’s perception toward augmented reality-infused dramatic play. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(3), 455–474.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heim, M. (1998). Virtual realism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, W., Alem, L., Tecchia, F., Duh, H B-L. (2018). Augmented 3D hands: a gesture-based mixed reality system for distributed collaboration. Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces. 12, 2 pp. 77–89.

  • Johnson-Glenberg, M. C., Birchfield, D. A., Tolentino, L., & Koziupa, T. (2014). Collaborative embodied learning in mixed reality motion-capture environments: Two science studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(1), 86–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalpakis, S., Palaigeorgiou, G., & Kasvikis, K. (2018). Promoting historical thinking in schools through low fidelity, low-cost, easily reproduceable, tangible and embodied interactions. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 13(12), 67–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khoo, E. T., Cheok, A. D., Nguyen, T. H., & Pan, Z. (2008). Age invaders: Social and physical inter-generational mixed reality family entertainment. Virtual Reality, 12, 3–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitalong, K., Moody, M., Helminen, R., & Ancheta, G. (2009). Beyond the screen: Narrative mapping as a tool for evaluating a mixed-reality science museum exhibit. Technical Communication Quarterly, 18(2), 142–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitchenham, B.A. (2007). Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering (version 2.3). EBSE Technical Report, Keele University and University of Durham. Retrieved 15 March 2019 from https://www.elsevier.com/__data/promis_misc/525444systematicreviewsguide.pdf

  • Kitchenham, B., Pretorius, R., Budgen, D., Brereton, O. P., Turner, M., Niazi, M., et al. (2010). Systematic literature reviews in software engineering – A tertiary study. Information and Software Technology, 52(8), 792–805.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leonard, S. N. & Fitzgerald, R. N. (2018). Holographic Learning: A Mixed Reality Trial of Microsoft HoloLens in an Australian Secondary School. Research in Learning Technology, 26.

  • Lindgren, R., Tscholl, M., Wang, S., & Johnson, E. (2016). Enhancing learning and engagement through embodied interaction within a mixed reality simulation. Computers & Education, 95, 174–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mateu, J., & Alaman, X. (2013). CUBICA: An example of mixed reality. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 19(17), 2598–2616.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mateu, J., Lasala, M., & Alamán, X. (2014). VirtualTouch: A tool for developing mixed reality educational applications and an example of use for inclusive education. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 30(10), 815–828.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milgram, P. & Kishino, A. (1994). Taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE transactions on information and systems, 1321–1329.

  • Milgram, P., Takemura, H., Utsumi, A., and Kishino, F. (1995). Augmented reality: A class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum. In Telemanipulator and telepresence technologies, volume 2351, (pp. 282–293). International Society for Optics and Photonics.

  • Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). The PRISMA group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed1000097.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palaigeorgiou, G., Karakostas, A., & Skenteridou, K. (2018). Touching and traveling on 3D augmented tangible maps for learning geography: The finger trips approach. Interactive Technology and Smart Education. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-12-2017-0066.

  • Pan, Z., Zhigeng, A. D., Yang, H., Zhu, J., & Shi, J. (2006). Virtual reality and mixed reality for virtual learning environments. Computers & Graphics, 30(1), 20–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pellas, N., Fotaris, P., Kazanidis, I., & Wells, D. (2018). Augmenting the learning experience in primary and secondary school education: A systematic review of recent trends in augmented reality game-based learning. Virtual reality. Special issue: “Virtual and augmented reality for enhanced experience in education and learning”. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-018-0347-2.

  • Ponto, K., Kuester, F., Nideffer, R., & Penny, S. (2006). Virtual bounds: A teleoperated mixed reality. Virtual Reality, 10, 41–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Punch, K. (1998). Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, Y., Scaife, M., Gabrielli, S., Smith, H., & Harris, E. (2002). A conceptual framework for mixed reality environments: Designing novel learning activities for young children. Presence, 11, 677–686.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, A. (2014). Designing for engagement in mixed reality experiences that combine projection mapping and camera-based interaction. Digital Creativity, 25(2), 155–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, C. K., & Gregory, D. M. (2003). Evaluation of qualitative research studies. Evidence-Based Nursing, 6(2), 36–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stretton, T., Cochrane, T., & Narayan, V. (2018). Exploring mobile mixed reality in healthcare higher education: A systematic review. Research in Learning Technology, 26, 21–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sugimoto, M. (2011). A mobile mixed-reality environment for children’s storytelling using a handheld projector and a robot. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 4(3), 249–260.

  • Tamura, H., Yamamoto, H., & Katayama, A. (2001). Mixed reality: Future dreams seen at the border between real and virtual worlds. Computer Graphics and Applications, 21(6), 64–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports (2018). http://ipscience-help.thomsonreuters.com/incitesLiveJCR/8275-TRS.html. Accessed 23 Aug 2018.

  • Tolentino, L., Birchfield, D., Megowan-Romanowicz, M. C., Johnson-Glenberg, M. C., Kelliher, A., & Martinez, C. (2009). Teaching and learning in the mixed reality science classroom. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(6), 501–517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xiao, R., Schwarz, J., Throm, N., Wilson, A., & Benko, H. (2018). MRTouch: Adding touch input to HeadMounted mixed reality. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 24(4), 1653–1660.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, S., Elinich, K., Wang, J., Steinmeier, C., & Tucker, S. (2012). Using augmented reality and knowledge-building scaffolds to improve learning in a science museum. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7(4), 519–541.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, Z., Cheok, A., Tedjokusumo, J., & Omer, G. (2008). wIzQubesTM- A novel tangible Interface for interactive storytelling in mixed reality. The International Journal of Virtual Reality, 7(4), 9–15.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Communication and Digital Media, University of Western Macedonia, Fourka, GR-52100, Kastoria, Greece

    Nikolaos Pellas

  2. Advanced Educational Technologies & Mobile Applications Lab, International Hellenic University, Ag. Loukas, GR-65404, Kavala, Greece

    Ioannis Kazanidis

  3. Department of Primary education, University of Western Macedonia, Ikaron 3, GR-50132, Kozani, Greece

    George Palaigeorgiou

Authors
  1. Nikolaos Pellas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ioannis Kazanidis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. George Palaigeorgiou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nikolaos Pellas.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendices

Table 9 The specific protocol that was executed in each database
Full size table
Table 10 Technological equipment and components of MR supported environments in primary education
Full size table
Table 11 Technological equipment and components of MR supported environments in secondary education
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pellas, N., Kazanidis, I. & Palaigeorgiou, G. A systematic literature review of mixed reality environments in K-12 education. Educ Inf Technol 25, 2481–2520 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10076-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10076-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation