Augmented Reality (AR )

Augmented Reality (AR) can be defined as “a newer technological system [compared to Virtual Reality (VR)] in which virtual objects are added to the real world in real-time during the user’s experience” (Cipresso et al., 2018: 4). What this means is that contrarily to VR, which entirely replaces the real world with one that is 3D and digitally designed, AR combines the physical with the virtual, allowing so users to maintain a view on the real-world environment, add virtual objects to it, and interact with them once placed into the environment. AR can easily be experienced, in a through-the-camera-lens fashion, on both mobile and tablet devices through apps, QR codes, and web browsers. Popular examples of AR technology are Pokèmon Go and SnapChat’s / Instagram’s filters.

• University of Brighton’s Case Studies: SET, School of Media, and BBS.

1. INTERACTION: 

Pros:

• Compared to VR and Mixed Reality (MR), AR software and hardware are, respectively, easier to source and cheaper to buy (to some extent), for both staff and students.
• AR can be experienced across a variety of devices (e.g. desktop, mobiles, tablets, etc) which are highly familiar to students and educators, cost-effective and, often portable. All of which increases the facility to implement this form of learning within and outside the classroom and both in an individual and/or collaborative fashion.
• As for MR, AR’s distinct ability to create immersive hybrid learning environments that combine digital and physical objects can support the development of processing skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and communication through interdependent collaborative exercises.

Cons: 

• The time and cost for the development of ‘in-house’ or ‘customized externally sourced’ AR experiences are still high. Educators can rely on already existing and cost-effective (often free) virtual educational platforms/applications but they will often find out that those may not be appropriate or in line with their intended teaching and learning outcomes.
• There is, therefore, a risk of disrupting the learning rather than enhancing it and/or of reproducing traditional methods of teaching within a virtual environment rather than inventing new collaborative ones.
• While individual distant learning could be enhanced, distant collaborative work through AR is not yet an option.

2. INCLUSIVITY: 

Pros:

• Compared to other immersive solutions, AR software and supported devices are both more accessible and more easily implementable within the already existing infrastructure (as no cables, trackers or additional computers are needed), and adaptable to the needs of individual’s students.
• AR can allow students to collectively ‘view’, ‘engage’, ‘interact’ with objects otherwise inaccessible because of costs, danger or distance (e.g. human hearts dissection, dangerous chemicals, black holes, bombs, etc), or even in ways simply impossible to realize in the traditional educational setting.
• AR can help enhance not only student’s learning outcomes, but also self-confidence, memory, engagement, creativity, and empathy, encouraging so cohesion and mutual understanding within the group of students.
• The possibility to learn independently from distance, by simply logging-in into the designed immersive AR learning experience (with a mobile, tablet or desktop), can also accommodate some of the students’ needs and difficulties.

Cons: 

• AR mainly allows a visual (through-the-camera-lens) type of experience. For instance, while the adjustment of sound and the use of subtitles or pop-up boxes explaining tasks or things within the AR experience could be added and be considered as steps towards inclusivity, haptic technologies that could allow the simulation of other senses (e.g. touch and smell) and better support some student’s individual needs, are not yet an easy option.
• Other learning difficulties may require the creation/adoption of different and specific AR experiences for some students. While potentially costly and timely, this approach could create a sense of exclusion in the affected students.
• Educators can run the risk of using/creating AR software that are not necessarily suited for all student’s needs. The learning can be disrupted and the students can become disengaged, demotivated, less confident and excluded from the group or the activity being thought.

3. INNOVATION: 

Pros:

• AR, like any other immersive medium, offers the opportunity to revolutionize traditional modes of teaching and learning, apply and enhance powerful pedagogies such as ‘situated learning’ and ‘transfer’, and create more exciting and interactive learning activities that meet the requirements of 21st-century students (prospect and current).
• In recent years, a greater convergence towards mobile and small wearable devices has been observed and it is expected to keep on being so in the near future, therefore, placing AR in a well-suited position for the next years to come (however, it is still an immersive medium and so it is still subjected to uncertainty).

Cons:

• As the boundaries of what can be done with this technologies are yet to be written, while raising incredible opportunities to experiment with innovative pedagogies, it also raises significant challenges as case studies and clear guidance on how and when to effectively apply these media within teaching are still lacking.
• As this is an emerging sector and technology keeps on evolving fast, any decision taken today is subject to uncertainty. It is therefore important not to rely only on AR, as it is yet to be seen where it all will go and what our students will ultimately expect in the years to come.

4. INFORMED: 

Pros:

• Knowing the technological and pedagogical affordances and limits of AR compared to other immersive and non-immersive media can support educators to make informed choices regarding which tool/s to use, how, and when. All of which can help educators and the institution reduce the risk of failure, the risk of wasting time and money and, instead, maximize the success of each experiment with benefits to the students learning.
• As years go by, there will be an increasing number of case studies available to us, explaining how and when to effectively apply these media in education and which one/s to use in which context/s.

Cons:

• Staff needs to invest additional time in planning a series of learning activities based around these immersive experiences in order for students to benefit from the full learning opportunities presented.
• If AR content is externally sourced, educators could face copyright constraints that could limit the number of options available to them, as well as risks to disrupt the students’ learning if the sourced and chosen AR-activity is not in line with the intended learning and teaching objectives.
• As this technology evolves, more and new ways of collecting personal user data consequently emerge, raising so new questions and concerns regarding how to deal and protect these new forms of data and who else could have access to it beyond the university.

5. INVESTMENT: 

Pros:

• Compared to VR and MR, and although still not perfect, AR is already widely adopted in many sectors and a greater number of AR educational, cost-effective and easy to use, applications and experiences have started to be witnessed in the industry and adopted by many educators worldwide.
• Acquisition of AR supported devices is often not needed as both students and educators would likely to already possess at least a mobile, a computer or a tablet.
• Any AR-based activities developed and/or externally sourced, can be kept for the next years to come and be revisited or edited according to the educator’s and students’ needs. While this can save time to educators and costs to the institution in the long run, it can also allow distant students to learn in a more interactive and engaging way, therefore, and potentially, expanding the reach of the university.

Cons:

• While the costs involved with buying, setting-up and maintaining AR related software and supported devices may be relatively small, the opportunities for including more people in creating content and using the equipment/software will have implications for staff and student training and support (time and money investment).

• Because ‘in-house’ AR content production is still difficult to afford or execute given the complexity of AR software algorithms (requiring the ability to develop immersive hybrid experiences that combine digital and physical objects), there will likely to be the need of relying on external immersive agencies/applications/platforms providers of the immersive AR activity needed (potentially costly and timely).