Будь ласка, використовуйте цей ідентифікатор, щоб цитувати або посилатися на цей матеріал:
http://elibrary.kdpu.edu.ua/xmlui/handle/123456789/10956| Назва: | Enhancing high school students' understanding of molecular geometry with augmented reality |
| Автори: | Karnishyna, Diana A. Selivanova, Tetiana V. Нечипуренко, Павло Павлович Starova, Tetiana V. Семеріков, Сергій Олексійович Карнішина, Діана Андріївна Селіванова, Тетяна Валеріївна Старова, Тетяна Валеріївна |
| Ключові слова: | augmented reality chemistry education molecular geometry spatial reasoning conceptual understanding Blippar multimedia learning instructional design mixed-methods research secondary education |
| Дата публікації: | 24-жов-2024 |
| Видавництво: | Academy of Cognitive and Natural Sciences |
| Бібліографічний опис: | Karnishyna D. A. Enhancing high school students' understanding of molecular geometry with augmented reality / Diana A. Karnishyna, Tetiana V. Selivanova, Pavlo P. Nechypurenko, Tetiana V. Starova, Serhiy O. Semerikov // Science Education Quarterly. – 2024. – Vol. 1. – Iss. 2. – P. 25–40. – DOI : https://doi.org/10.55056/seq.818 |
| Короткий огляд (реферат): | Augmented reality (AR) has emerged as a promising technology for supporting chemistry education by providing interactive and engaging visualizations of abstract concepts. This study investigated the effectiveness of an AR-based learning module developed using the Blippar platform for teaching molecular geometry to high school students. A quasi-experimental design was employed, with 49 students assigned to either the AR intervention or traditional instruction. Pre- and post-tests, surveys, and interviews were conducted to assess students' conceptual understanding, spatial reasoning, perceptions, and experiences. The results showed that the AR group significantly outperformed the control group in terms of measures of content knowledge and spatial ability. Students reported high levels of satisfaction, engagement, and intention to use AR for learning chemistry. The design features and instructional strategies that facilitated effective learning with AR were identified, including scaffolding, multiple representations, and real-world applications. However, technical challenges and the need for integration with other pedagogical approaches were also noted. The findings contribute to the theoretical and empirical foundations of AR in chemistry education and provide practical implications for the design and implementation of AR-based learning experiences in this domain. Future research should investigate the long-term impacts, individual differences, and collaborative aspects of learning with AR in chemistry. |
| Опис: | Abdinejad, M., Talaie, B., Qorbani, H.S. and Dalili, S., 2021. Student Perceptions Using Augmented Reality and 3D Visualization Technologies in Chemistry Education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 30(1), pp.87–96. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09880-2. Abrahamson, D., 2014. Building educational activities for understanding: An elaboration on the embodied-design framework and its epistemic grounds. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 2(1), pp.1–16. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2014.07.002. Ainsworth, S., 2006. DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), pp.183–198. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.03.001. Azuma, R.T., 1997. A Survey of Augmented Reality. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 6(4), pp.355–385. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1997.6.4.355. Blippar Group Limited, 2024. Create & Build AR | Blippbuilder Free 3D Augmented Reality Tool - Blippar. Available from: https://www.blippar.com/build-ar. Bobkova, O.S., Bukhtiiarov, V.K., Valiuk, V.F., Velychko, L.P., Dubovyk, O.A., Pavlenko, V.O. and Puhach, S.V., 2017. Chemistry. 10-11 grades. Profile level: Curriculum for institutions of general secondary education. Available from: https://mon.gov.ua/storage/app/media/zagalna%20serednya/programy-10-11-klas/2018-2019/ximiya-10-11-profilnij-riven.docx. Braun, V. and Clarke, V., 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), pp.77–101. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa. Brown, J.S., Collins, A. and Duguid, P., 1989. Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), pp.32–42. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018001032. Bujak, K.R., Radu, I., Catrambone, R., MacIntyre, B., Zheng, R. and Golubski, G., 2013. A psychological perspective on augmented reality in the mathematics classroom. Computers & Education, 68, pp.536–544. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.017. Cai, S., Wang, X. and Chiang, F.K., 2014. A case study of Augmented Reality simulation system application in a chemistry course. Computers in Human Behavior, 37, pp.31–40. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.04.018. Cavin, C.S., Cavin, E.D. and Lagowski, J.J., 1981. The effect of computer-assisted instruction on the attitudes of college students toward computers and chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 18(4), pp.329–333. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660180407. Chen, P., Liu, X., Cheng, W. and Huang, R., 2017. A review of using Augmented Reality in Education from 2011 to 2016. In: E. Popescu, Kinshuk, M.K. Khribi, R. Huang, M. Jemni, N.S. Chen and D.G. Sampson, eds. Innovations in Smart Learning. Singapore: Springer Singapore, Lecture Notes in Educational Technology, pp.13–18. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2419-1_2. Chen, S.Y. and Liu, S.Y., 2020. Using augmented reality to experiment with elements in a chemistry course. Computers in Human Behavior, 111, p.106418. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106418. Creswell, J.W. and Plano Clark, V.L., 2017. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. 3rd ed. SAGE Publications. Davis, F.D., 1989. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), pp.319–340. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2307/249008. Domínguez Alfaro, J.L., Gantois, S., Blattgerste, J., De Croon, R., Verbert, K., Pfeiffer, T. and Van Puyvelde, P., 2022. Mobile Augmented Reality Laboratory for Learning Acid–Base Titration. Journal of Chemical Education, 99(2), pp.531–537. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00894. Dunleavy, M., Dede, C. and Mitchell, R., 2009. Affordances and Limitations of Immersive Participatory Augmented Reality Simulations for Teaching and Learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(1), pp.7–22. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9119-1. Ebner, M. and Holzinger, A., 2007. Successful implementation of user-centered game based learning in higher education: An example from civil engineering. Computers & Education, 49(3), pp.873–890. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.026. Faridi, E., Ghaderian, A., Honarasa, F. and Shafie, A., 2021. Next generation of chemistry and biochemistry conference posters: Animation, augmented reality, visitor statistics, and visitors’ attention. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 49(4), pp.619–624. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21520. Field, A., 2017. Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics. 5th ed. SAGE Publications. Available from: http://repo.darmajaya.ac.id/5678/. García Franco, A. and Taber, K.S., 2009. Secondary Students’ Thinking about Familiar Phenomena: Learners’ explanations from a curriculum context where ‘particles’ is a key idea for organising teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 31(14), pp.1917–1952. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802307730. Gillespie, R.J., 1992. The VSEPR model revisited. Chemical Society Reviews, 21, pp.59–69. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1039/CS9922100059. Glenberg, A.M., 2010. Embodiment as a unifying perspective for psychology. WIREs Cognitive Science, 1(4), pp.586–596. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.55. Housecroft, C.E. and Sharpe, A.G., 2005. Inorganic Chemistry. 2nd ed. Pearson. Ibáñez, M.B. and Delgado-Kloos, C., 2018. Augmented reality for STEM learning: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 123, pp.109–123. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.05.002. Irwansyah, F.S., Yusuf, Y.M., Farida, I. and Ramdhani, M.A., 2018. Augmented Reality (AR) Technology on The Android Operating System in Chemistry Learning. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 288(1), p.012068. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/288/1/012068. Johnstone, A.H., 1991. Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7(2), pp.75–83. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.1991.tb00230.x. Johnstone, A.H., 2000. Teaching of chemistry – logical or psychological? Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 1(1), pp.9–15. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1039/A9RP90001B. Karnishyna, D.A., Selivanova, T.V., Nechypurenko, P.P., Starova, T.V. and Stoliarenko, V.G., 2022. The use of augmented reality in chemistry lessons in the study of “Oxygen-containing organic compounds” using the mobile application Blippar. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2288(1), p.012018. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2288/1/012018. Kozma, R., 2003. The material features of multiple representations and their cognitive and social affordances for science understanding. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), pp.205–226. External and Internal Representations in Multimedia Learning. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00021-X. Kozma, R.B., 2000. The Use of Multiple Representations and the Social Construction of Understanding in Chemistry. In: M.J. Jacobson and R.B. Kozma, eds. Innovations in Science and Mathematics Education: Advanced Designs for Technologies of Learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp.11–46. Available from: https://www.academia.edu/42103279. Lave, J. and Wenger, E., 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Learning in Doing: Social, Cognitive and Computational Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355. Lindgren, R. and Johnson-Glenberg, M., 2013. Emboldened by Embodiment: Six Precepts for Research on Embodied Learning and Mixed Reality. Educational Researcher, 42(8), pp.445–452. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X13511661. Mayer, R.E., 2020. Multimedia Learning. 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316941355. Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M. and Saldaña, J., 2014. Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook. 3rd ed. SAGE Publications. Available from: https://www.metodos.work/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Qualitative-Data-Analysis.pdf. Nechypurenko, P.P., Semerikov, S.O. and Pokhliestova, O.Y., 2023. An augmented reality-based virtual chemistry laboratory to support educational and research activities of 11th grade students. Educational Dimension, 8, p.240–264. Available from: https://doi.org/10.31812/educdim.4446. Paas, F., Gog, T. van and Sweller, J., 2010. Cognitive Load Theory: New Conceptualizations, Specifications, and Integrated Research Perspectives. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), pp.115–121. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9133-8. Pence, H.E., 2010. Smartphones, Smart Objects, and Augmented Reality. The Reference Librarian, 52(1-2), pp.136–145. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/02763877.2011.528281. Radu, I., 2014. Augmented reality in education: a meta-review and cross-media analysis. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 18(6), pp.1533–1543. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-013-0747-y. Rau, M.A., 2015. Enhancing undergraduate chemistry learning by helping students make connections among multiple graphical representations. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16, pp.654–669. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1039/C5RP00065C. Revvity Signals Software, 2024. ChemDraw. Available from: https://revvitysignals.com/products/research/chemdraw. Schutera, S., Schnierle, M., Wu, M., Pertzel, T., Seybold, J., Bauer, P., Teutscher, D., Raedle, M., Heß-Mohr, N., Röck, S. and Krause, M.J., 2021. On the Potential of Augmented Reality for Mathematics Teaching with the Application cleARmaths. Education sciences, 11(8), p.368. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080368. Semerikov, S.O., Vakaliuk, T.A., Mintii, I.S., Hamaniuk, V.A., Soloviev, V.N., Bondarenko, O.V., Nechypurenko, P.P., Shokaliuk, S.V., Moiseienko, N.V. and Shepiliev, D.S., 2022. Immersive E-Learning Resources: Design Methods. Digital Humanities Workshop. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, DHW 2021, p.37–47. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1145/3526242.3526264. Sweller, J., 1994. Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4(4), pp.295–312. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5. Taber, K.S., 2008. Towards a Curricular Model of the Nature of Science. Science & Education, 17(2), pp.179–218. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-006-9056-4. Tasker, R., 2014. Research into practice: Visualising the molecular world for a deep understanding of chemistry. Teaching science, 60(2), pp.16–27. Vesna Ferk, Margareta Vrtacnik, A.B. and Gril, A., 2003. Students’ understanding of molecular structure representations. International Journal of Science Education, 25(10), pp.1227–1245. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069022000038231. Vlasenko, K.V., Lovianova, I.V., Volkov, S.V., Sitak, I.V., Chumak, O.O., Krasnoshchok, A.V., Bohdanova, N.G. and Semerikov, S.O., 2022. UI/UX design of educational on-line courses. CTE Workshop Proceedings, 9, p.184–199. Available from: https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.114. Wilson, M., 2002. Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), pp.625–636. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196322. Wu, H.K., Krajcik, J.S. and Soloway, E., 2001. Promoting understanding of chemical representations: Students’ use of a visualization tool in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), pp.821–842. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.1033. Wu, H.K., Lee, S.W.Y., Chang, H.Y. and Liang, J.C., 2013. Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education. Computers & Education, 62, pp.41–49. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.024. Zhai, X. and Jackson, D.F., 2023. A pedagogical framework for mobile learning in science education. In: R.J. Tierney, F. Rizvi and K. Ercikan, eds. International Encyclopedia of Education. 4th ed. Oxford: Elsevier, pp.215–223. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818630-5.13037-4. Zhang, J., Li, G., Huang, Q., Feng, Q. and Luo, H., 2022. Augmented Reality in K–12 Education: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Literature from 2000 to 2020. Sustainability, 14(15), p.9725. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159725. |
| URI (Уніфікований ідентифікатор ресурсу): | https://acnsci.org/journal/index.php/seq/article/view/818 https://doi.org/10.55056/seq.818 http://elibrary.kdpu.edu.ua/xmlui/handle/123456789/10956 |
| ISSN: | 3065-7210 |
| Розташовується у зібраннях: | Кафедра інформатики та прикладної математики |
Файли цього матеріалу:
| Файл | Опис | Розмір | Формат | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SEQ_818_Karnishyna_et_al.pdf | 778.28 kB | Adobe PDF | Переглянути/Відкрити |
Усі матеріали в архіві електронних ресурсів захищені авторським правом, всі права збережені.