EDUC 639 Research Prospectus.docx - - Corinne …cblake28.weebly.com/uploads/1/9/6/9/19698813/educ639... · Web viewCurrent research into the applications of augmented reality (AR)

Running head: RESEARCH PROSPECTUS: AUGMENTED REALITY

Research Prospectus: Augmented Reality Integration in Algebra I

Misty Antonioli, Corinne Blake, & Kelly Sparks

Liberty University

EDUC 639

1

RESEARCH PROSPECTUS: AUGMENTED REALITY

Abstract

This mix methods experimental study aims to examine the effects of augmented reality (AR) on

a tablet device, and how it will increase students’ level of performance to “School of

Distinction,” obtaining at least proficiency on the Algebra I end of course (EOC) assessment, and

school designation in terms of performance. Pre- and post-tests will be administered to calculate

the increase in growth. The qualitative aspect will conclude how AR increases students’

engagement, through teacher and student surveys. Algebra I students from three different school

districts located in the rural northwestern part of North Carolina will participate in the three

month research process.

Keywords: Algebra I, augmented reality (AR), mixed methods, tablet

2


Background and Brief Review of the Literature

Current research into the applications of augmented reality (AR) technology in the

classroom has focused mainly on middle school science, but the versatility of the technology

opens its potential to implementation in many K-12 classrooms. AR technology allows

educators to enhance the learning experience of students using computers, tablets, or

smartphones while overlaying images, texts, video, and audio components onto existing images

or space. It has the ability to span over a variety of curricula and age levels despite the

educational research focus on the critical time period of middle school in terms of interest and

confidence building potential (Bressler & Bodzin, 2013).

This study stems from the lack of literature available for uses of AR in other content

areas besides middle school science. In addition, this study will be focusing on the school

districts of Halifax County North Carolina where the data shows a need for an increase in

Algebra I scores. Although the data shows that over the past few years there has been an

increase in the amount of students that tested at or above grade level for the Algebra I EOC

scores for the ABC (accountability, basics, control) tests in North Carolina (see Appendix for

student proficiency data), there is still a lack of understanding for many students. Currently all

schools that will be used for sampling are considered a “School of Progress” meaning that 60-

80% of their students are at grade level (Public Schools of North Carolina, n.d.). This research

will determine if the use of AR will increase the number of students that are proficient and

increase the school’s level of performance to “School of Distinction” (80%-90%), “School of

Excellence” (at least 90%), or an “Honor School of Excellence” (at least 90% with all other

Annual Measurable Objectives met).

3


AR has been proven to increase the understanding of students in the field of science.

Previous research has also shown that the implementation of AR in the classroom will increase

the engagement of the student (Dunleavy, Dede & Mitchell, 2009). Studies show that students

participating in a student-centered learning dynamic have an increase in both content

understanding and engagement (Enyedy, Danish, Delacruz, & Kumar, 2012; Kamarien et al.,

2013). Qualitative research by Billinghurst and Dunser (2012) showed that both elementary and

high school students that used augmented books had an enhanced learning experiences and

increased engagement. Collaborative gaming using AR technology has also been found to

encourage high levels of engagement in student participants (Dunleavy et al., 2009). Teachers

and students agree that collaboration increases when AR technologies are used (Annetta, Burton,

Frazier, Cheng, & Chmiel, 2012; Billinghurst & Dunser, 2012; Bressler & Bodzin, 2013;

DeLucia, Francese, Passero, & Tortoza., 2012; Dunleavy et al., 2009; Kamarainen et al., 2013;

Morrison et al., 2011). In addition, researchers have shown that students have an increased

desire to share experiences and increased social learning after using AR in the classroom (Serio,

Ibanez, & Carlos, 2013).

With educational movements focusing more on student-centered environments, it is

important to study the tools that will properly enable the shift from a teacher-centered classroom.

AR educational technologies encourage the engagement of students in relevant problems to

organize, synthesize, and analyze content, which fosters constructivist principles (DeLucia et al.,

2012). Collins and Halverston (2009) stressed the importance of educators rethinking the ways in

which they teach to accommodate just-in-time learning theories in which students learn what

they need to know now. Links to AR and engagement can also be made with the self-

determination theory that defines learning through motivation (Rigby & Przyblyski, 2009).

4


Further research is needed on how to effectively implement both theory and technology in

instructional design that is beneficial to the students.

Despite the focus of current research heavily weighted in the sciences, mention can be

found on the benefits of using AR with math. Billinghurst and Dunser (2012) refer to the

application of AR to provide engaging educational experiences to teach math and how studies,

“have found that this activity enhances student motivation, involvement, and engagement,” (p.

60). Dunleavy et al. (2009) incorporated design components to target other content areas such

as math in their AR gaming study. Further research is needed on what effects AR can have in

math-centered learning environment in comparison to studies done with science content.

Since AR is versatile, it has also been used for many applications outside of the

classroom. Van Krevelen and Poelman (2010) have determined that AR can be used for

designing equipment, assembling vehicles, maintenance, military combat training, and even

medical applications. Home use applications such as those that allow homebuyers to view how

their furniture will fit prior to moving in, astronomy applications that show the user what

constellations and stars are in their own backyard, as well as translation programs that will

change the wording from one language to another are becoming increasingly popular.

Problem Statement

With the induction of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2001 many schools are

being held accountable for the proficiency levels of their students. Core subject areas such as

Language Arts, Math and Science are all being focused on with scrutiny. The goal is for 100%

of the students attending public schools to perform to their grade level on state issued tests. This

goal is still far from being reached even with the increase in proficiency levels in Halifax

County. According to the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (NCDPI) most recent

5


data for the 2010-2011 school year, all three districts participating in the study did not met

adequate yearly progress (AYP) (NCDPI, n.d.). Northwest High and Southeast High each met

7/13 target goals (53.8%), Roanoke Rapids Graded School District met 11/17 targets (64.7%),

and Weldon STEM High scored 4/5 targets (80%). A random sampling of students from various

schools in Halifax County will be tested in order to determine if technology, specifically AR,

will increase the understanding and the engagement of students in the subject area of Algebra I.

Significance of the Study

The purpose of this study is to address the lack of research on the use of AR in the

content area of math while determining if AR has the same effectiveness through understanding

and engagement as it does in the field of science. This study will allow mathematics teachers to

consider the use of AR in their classrooms as well as determine if it is a useful tool to increase

test scores for individual students and the school. The knowledge gained from this study will

give teachers a better idea of if AR is a worthwhile technology to begin implementing in their

21st century classroom. Professional development is a key component to the teaching

profession, and what training is disbursed can also be determined by the results of this study.

For instance, if results show a significant advantage to using AR in the classroom, teachers will

need proper training on the implementation of this technology. In addition, the results of this

study can guide the school districts in budget making decisions when determining what types of

technology or even textbooks to invest in purchasing. This will in turn affect all of the

stakeholders involved within the school community.

Research Questions

This research will determine if the use of AR will increase the number of students that are

proficient and increase the school’s level of performance to “School of Distinction.” The

6


research questions for this study are (a) Do students show an increase in understanding and

Algebra I content knowledge when using AR technology?, (b) Is there an increase in obtaining at

least proficiency on the Algebra I EOC for students who use AR?, and (c) Is there an increase in

a school’s designation in terms of their level of performance when AR is use in Algebra I

instruction?

Research Hypotheses in Null Form

The following are the null hypotheses:

H1: Algebra I students who use AR technology during instructional time will show no

increase in their EOC scores as compared to students who are exposed to traditional instructional

methods (Enyedy et al., 2012; Kamarinen et al., 2013).

H2: The traditional instructional class will have no statistically significant difference in

Algebra I proficiency on EOC tests when compared to classes using AR technology (Billinghurst

& Dunser, 2012).

Identification of Variables

The independent variable for the quantitative study will be the use of AR on a tablet.

Dependent variables that are being measured will be used to calculate the level of student

understanding in both the pre- and post-test. The analysis of these variables will determine if

their is an increase in the (a) students’ level of performance to “School of Distinction,” (b)

students obtaining at least proficiency on the Algebra I EOC assessment, and (c) school

designation in terms of performance. Measurement will be obtained from the results gained

from the pre- to post-test. Pre- and post-tests will mirror the ABC tests given for the EOC by

using the released test provided by the state and will be graded by each individual teacher

7


(NCDPI, 2012). However, the questions and grading procedures will remain constant. The

questions for the pre- and post-test will be given to both the experimental and control groups.

In order to determine if there is an increase in engagement when students are using AR

in their studies, each student will complete a survey at the end of the three-month period.

Sample questions included on the survey are (a) “did using AR increase your want to learn

beyond what was required,” (b) “were you more motivated to complete work using AR,” (c)“did

you feel like you were engaged in the material when using AR,” and (d) “do you feel that

complicated questions were easier to answer because you used AR” (Billinghurst & Dunser,

2012). Teachers will also complete a survey, however, this survey will be unique to them. The

teacher will create a list of their students and rate their students’ engagement. A 5-point Likert

scale will be utilized on both surveys. The research will be validated using the following

definitions

● The AR source used are trigger images from the book Augmented Reality Used in Math

Class: How to Connect Technology and the Common Core by Courtney Pepe along with

the technology application LAYAR. LAYAR is an AR platform that enables individuals

to scan print and view layers of information such as videos, photos, and sound (LAYAR,

n.d.).

● Level of understanding is defined for each student as the increase of problems correct as

a percentage between the pre- and post-tests. For the school the level of understanding

will be considered the average increase in the number of questions correct between the

pre- and post-exam in the form of percentages. The same test will be used for both the

pre- and post-tests. In addition, all classes participating will receive the same test. This

8


is used to ensure the validity of the experiment as standardization promotes fairness and

improves generalization (Kane, 2013).

● Level of engagement is defined as the perception of the teachers and students of time on

task this will be compared by the observer to the student’s previous classroom

performance. The 5-point Likert scales used on the surveys to measure the perception of

engagement are effective in providing statistically reliable measures (Adelson &

McCoach, 2010).

Methodology

Research Design

A mixed method experimental research design will be used for this study to determine if

AR technology positively impacts student content knowledge, engagement, overall student

proficiency, and student performance. The mixed method research design was chosen to bridge

the gap between the understanding and the engagement levels of the students. It will provide

both rational and innate views to the research in the attempt to provide clarity to the subject

matter. For the quantitative aspect of this study, the design will include a multi-group, random

selection, pre-test/post-test format. There are three school districts with four high schools

between them. Each of the high schools will have classes randomly selected for both a control

class and an experimental class. The students will be given a pre-test on the Algebra I concepts

that will be covered during a three month span. The control group will be taught as usual with

the traditional book, paper, and pencil method while the experimental class will have access to

technology tablets to be used for implementing AR trigger images into the lessons. At the

completion of the three months, all students will be given a post-test to determine their level of

knowledge gained. The average percent increase of those students in the experimental group

9


will be analyzed against the average percent increase of those in the control group for each

school. Finally, a cross examination between the four schools’ results will be compared in order

to see if any trends occur.

In the qualitative aspect of this study, the students and teachers will be surveyed in order

to determine the level of engagement in AR activities. The answers to these surveys will help to

determine if students that use AR can be considered more engaged in the learning process than

those who do not use AR. These researchers believe that the use of AR in Algebra I courses will

significantly increase both the engagement and understanding of students. In the event that the

researchers determine AR to be truly effective, then additional implementation of AR will be

performed and further research will be applied with the results of the EOC tests given for that

school year.

Participants/ Sampling

A multi-stage sampling was performed for this research. In the first stage, the Halifax

County was identified due to the close location to one of the researchers. In the second stage, at

least one school from each school district in the county was chosen. The third stage determined

what mathematics course will be focused on and Algebra I classes were chosen. This will be

considered the sampling frame for this study. These three stages of selection are considered

purposive as each was chosen for a specified reason. Each school sampled will use one

controlled Algebra I class with no AR usage and one class with AR. Students are placed within

the Algebra I classes due to a computerized programming system based on the other classes

students need to take. Students are placed in Algebra I either due to their stage of progress or the

need for graduation credit. Which classes that will be chosen for the control and variable will be

done at random.

10


Setting

This study will take place in four schools: Roanoke Rapids High School, Weldon STEM

High School, Northwest High School, and Southeast High School in Halifax County. All four

schools are located in rural northeastern North Carolina. The implementation of AR will be

performed in traditional standard level Algebra I classrooms during the Fall 2014 semester. AR

instruction will incorporate the use of tablet devices during daily classroom activities on the

campus.

With the AR technology, students will be able to use the tablet to scan trigger images that

have been created within an Algebra I textbook. The app LAYAR will be used to read the

trigger images. Students will then access quick screencasts that will provide them instructions of

what tasks they are to complete for the day. Topics covered within the first month of instruction

will include (a) comparing and ordering real numbers, (b) solving and writing multi-step linear

equations, (c) graphing, solving, and writing compound inequalities, as well as (d) analyzing data

for the existence of a pattern and represent it both algebraically and graphically. The second

month students will learn about (a) relations and functions, (b) domain and range, (c) constant

rates of change, and they will (d) identify and write linear equations given a graph, two points, or

the slope and a point on the line. To complete this research study in three months, the last set of

topics students will be exposed to are (a) solving systems of linear equations using graphing,

substitution, and the elimination method and (b) write, solve, and graph systems of linear

inequalities.

Instrumentation

Student participants will complete ABC EOC pre- and post-tests to assess student

knowledge. The tests will be created by researchers using key questions from the Algebra I EOC

11


released exam that are aligned with the curriculum goals that will be covered over the three

month period. The released exam is a representation of the potential types of questions provided

to schools to help prepare students for future assessments by familiarizing them with test taking

strategies since the test form had been given to a cohort of students during pilot testing (Public

Schools of North Carolina, 2012). The same pre-test will be given as a post-test to assess

increases in student content knowledge. Since the questions are directly from the state

department of education, they are precisely correlated with potential EOC questions. Therefore,

their use in measuring student content knowledge is reliable. Statistical analysis of the data will

support the validity of the measure.

Students will rate each question on the survey at the end of the research period that

utilizes a 5-point Likert scale (i.e. 1 = not at all, 2 = not really, 3 = undecided, 4 = somewhat, 5 =

very much). While the content of the teacher survey is different, it will also employ a 5-point

Likert scale (i.e. 1 = not engaged, 2 = not very engaged, 3 = neutral, 4 = somewhat engaged, 5 =

very engaged) before the integration of AR, and then again after they have used AR for the

complete study. The Likert scale was developed by the researchers according to the qualitative

data desired and followed a suggested 5-point measure according to research presented by

Adelson and McCoach (2010) for statistical analysis and validity measure. Reliability of the

data will depend on the willingness of the participants to answer the questions at the time of the

survey.

Observational protocols will be used during implementation of the research to ensure that

the technology is being used appropriately by the students. NetSupport School classroom

management system will be used with AR groups to allow teachers and researchers the ability to

monitor and interact with students while they are using their device (NetSupport, 2012). This

12


will ensure that engagement and understanding measures are directly related to student use of the

AR technology.

Proficiency measures will be determined by results on the Algebra I EOC at the end of

the semester. EOC and other multiple choice state assessments are created by NCDPI using a

test development process that includes item writing, review, field testing, and standards based on

pilot testing. The process is research based and proven to provide reliable data to show student

proficiency (NCDPI, 2003).

Procedures/ Data Collection

Before the study can take place, teachers will be ask to provide some personal

information as to limit threats to the validity of the study, which are discussed at length in the

assumptions and limitations section. This information should be submitted at least two weeks

before the start of the study as the researchers will need this information to prepare for any

unforeseen threats, have time to arrange adequate resources prepared for students and teachers

alike, and equip all teachers participating in the study with the proper training on implementing

the AR resource into multiple lessons. Next, letters to the students and their parents will need to

be written and mailed out. The letter will explain the details of the study as mentioned

previously, as well as request parental permission for their child to participate in the study.

After the initial details are completed for the study to take place, the following

instrumentation tools will be needed to conduct the study. An approved ABC type pre- and post-

test must be made on the Algebra I topics that will be taught throughout the study. A survey will

need to be made to address how students felt using AR throughout their three months of

experiences. Teachers will need to provide a list of students in each class in order to gauge the

students’ engagement levels both prior and after the use of AR.

13


The pre-test, post-test, student survey, initial teacher survey of students AR engagement

levels, and final teacher survey of students AR engagement levels will be collected from all the

participating schools by one of the researchers. The researcher will collect all materials at the

end of each week it was administered. This will continue throughout the three-month testing

period. The results will be processed by the researcher that picked up the materials, where the

results will be analyzed, shared to a secure location, and sent to the other researchers to confirm

results. Through processing the results, the researchers will be able to conclude the percentage

gain of engagement and understanding for students using AR. The results will be ultimately

shared for peer review and publication.

Data Analysis

The type of data analysis being used during this study is causal. This method has been

chosen by the researchers in order to ensure that only one variable is being manipulated to see

the effects it makes on the other aspects of the experiment. Due to the fact that there are multiple

dependent variables, student proficiency and school designation, with only one independent

variable, use of AR, in the study, a multiple analysis of variance (MANOVA) was chosen with a

p value= .05. Qualitative data that centers on student engagement will be analyzed using

grounded theory in which the researchers will take into account the survey responses from both

the students and the teachers to find a theoretical link between the use of AR and engagement

(Schutt, 2011).

Throughout the study, the researchers will be trying to find the link between the use of

AR and the changes it could possibly have on student understanding and engagement in Algebra

I courses. Both quantitative (test scores) and qualitative data (surveys) will have been collected

and analyzed. The claims made in H1 and H2 will be analyzed independently using Pearson r or

14


correlation analysis. This will determine if there is a relationship between the variables as well

as the direction and strength (Çetinkaya, 2013).

Assumptions and Limitations

It will be assumed that all students in the district have taken pre-algebra or an equivalent

course, and are prepared to take Algebra I. Another assumption is that the teachers are equally

qualified to teach Algebra I as well as have similar enough teaching styles that the difference in

teachers will not cause a significant margin of error. While survey questions will follow a Likert

scale, it is expected that there will be variation in the perception of engagement by both the

teachers and the students due to the different individual interpretations of observational data

(Kawulich, 2005). In other words, the measurement of engagement is relative to the observer,

which is also assumed.

Since up to eight different teachers will be participating in the study, one potential threat

to validity would be the highest degree level (i.e. bachelors, masters, doctorate) the educator has

completed. Teachers who have completed higher levels of education or even have multiple years

of service could be an additional threat to the validity of the study. Another consideration should

also be taken into account is the teachers confidence level using technology within their

classroom. One other factor that is a threat would be the number of students enrolled in each

class. To minimize these threats the researchers will have interested teachers fill out a short

survey before the study, asking them (a) what is highest educational degree you have received,

(b) how do feel about using technology within your classrooms, (c) how long have you been

teaching, and (d) what is your average Algebra I class size. The researchers will use this

information to create a group of teachers that will minimize all potential threats to the study.

15


References

Adelson, J.L, & McCoach, D.B. (2010). Measuring the mathematical attitudes of elementary

students: The effects of a 4-point or 5-point Likert-type scale. Educational and

Psychological Measurement, 70(5), 796-807. doi:10.1177/00131644103666694

Annetta, L., Burton, E. P., Frazier, W., Cheng, R., & Chmiel, M. (2012). Augmented reality

games: Using technology on a budget. Science Scope, 36(3), 54-60.

Billinghurst, M., & Dunser, A. (2012). Augmented reality in the classroom. Computer, 45(7),

56-63.

Bressler, D.M. & Bodzin, A.M. (2013). A mixed methods assessment of students’ flow

experience during a mobile augmented reality science game. Journal of Computer

Assisted Learning, 29(6), 505-517. doi: 10.1111/jal.12008

Çetinkaya, H. (2013). Correlation analysis: Pearson r. Retrieved from

http://homes.ieu.edu.tr/hcetinkaya/CORRELATION

Collins, A., & Halverston, R. (2009). Rethinking education in the age of technology: The digital

revolution and schooling in america. New York: Teachers College Press.

DeLucia, A., Francese, R., Passero, I., & Tortoza, G. (2012). A collaborative augmented campus

based on location-aware mobile technology. International Journal of Distance Education

Technologies, 10(1), 55-71.

http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/10.4018/jdet.2012010104

Dunleavy, M., Dede, C.,& Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and limitations of immersive

participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal of Science

Education and Technology, 18(1), 7-22.

Enyedy, N., Danish, J. A., Delacruz, G., & Kumar, M. (2012). Learning physics through play in

16


an augmented reality environment. International Journal of Computer-Supported

Collaborative Learning, 7(3), 347-378. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11412-012-9150-3

Kamarainen, A.M., Metcalf, S., Grotzer, T., Browne, A., Mazzuca, D., Tutwiler, M.S., & Dede,

C. (2013). EcoMOBILE: Integrating augmented reality and probeware with

environmental education field trips. Computers & Education, 68, 545-556.

doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.018

Kane, M. (2013). Validating the use and interpretation of test scores. Journal of Educational

Measurement, 50(1), 1-73. doi: 10.1111/jedm.12000

Kawulich, B. B. (2005). Participant observation as a data collection method. Forum: Qualitative

Social Research, 6(2), Art 43. Retrieved from

http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/466/996L#g 5

LAYAR. (n.d.). What is augmented reality. Retrieved from https://www.layar.com/augmented-

reality/

Morrison, A., Mulloni, A., Lemmela, S., Oulasvirta, A., Jacucci, G., Peltonen, P., Schmalstieg,

D., & Regenbrecht, H. (2011). Collaborative use of mobile augmented reality with paper

maps. Computers & Graphics, 35(4), 789-799.

NetSupport. (2012). NetSupport products. Retrieved from

http://www.netsupport-inc.com/products.asp

North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. (n.d.). AYP yearly progress reports.

Accountability Services Division. Retrieved from

http://www.ncpublicschools.org/accountability/reporting/aypresults

North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. (2003, April 20). Multiple-choice test

development process [pdf]. Retrieved from

17

http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/466/996L#g5

http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/466/996L#g5


http://www.dpi.state.nc.us/docs/accountability/testing/policies/mctestdevelopment/

RevisedTestDevelopmentProcessFinalFinal.pdf

North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. (2012). North Carolina READY end-of-course

assessment algebra I/integrated I [pdf]. Retrieved from

http://www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/accountability/testing/releasedforms/

alg1pprelease.pdf

Public Schools of North Carolina. (n.d.). Education First NC School Report Cards. Retrieved

from http://www.ncschoolreportcard.org/src/

Public Schools of North Carolina. (2012). Released forms. Retrieved from

http://www.ncpublicschools.org/accountability/testing/releasedforms

Rigby, C. S., & Przybylski, A. K. (2009). Virtual worlds and the learner hero: How today’s video

games can inform tomorrow’s digital learning environments. Theory and Research in

Education, 7(2), 214-223.

Schutt, R. K. (2011). Investigating the social world: The process and practice of research. (7

ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Serio, A.D., Ibanez, M.B. & Carlos, D.K. (2013). Impact of an augmented reality system on

students' motivation for a visual art course. Computers & Education, 68, 586-596.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.002

Van Krevelen, D. W. F., & Poelman, R. (2010). A survey of augmented reality technologies,

applications and limitations. The International Journal of Virtual Reality, 9(2), 1-20.

Retrieved from http://kjcomps.6te.net/upload/paper1%20.pdf

18


Appendix

This graph shows the score report for four schools in Halifax County in regards to the percentage of students that are considered proficient in Algebra I according to the EOC tests given.

Figure A1. Percentage of proficient student in Algebra I over a five year span from 2007-2012.

19

Documents

EDUC 639 Research Prospectus.docx - - Corinne …cblake28.weebly.com/uploads/1/9/6/9/19698813/educ639... · Web viewCurrent research into the applications of augmented reality (AR)