Open Journal Systems

Augmented reality and learning in organic chemistry

Salvador Ruiz Cerrillo

Article ID: 1780
Vol 1, Issue 2, 2020

VIEWS - 204 (Abstract)

Abstract

The use of augmented reality (AR) in the teaching-learning process of organic chemistry is considered an innovation in the didactics of this type of content and an area of opportunity for the so-called education 4.0. The aim of this article is to evaluate the learning in organic chemistry of bachelor’s degree students with the support of AR. The approach of the study was mixed and a rubric was used as the main instrument for the evaluation of AR projects designed with the HP Reveal^®application, as well as a quick test or quiz that allowed the evaluation of specific student learning. The results showed an average score of 8.3/10 in the quality of the AR projects; the average obtained in the exam was 7.94/10. In conclusion, AR projects in high school students improve learning conditions in the area of chemistry through the identification of formulas and nomenclature of organic compounds.

Keywords

augmented reality; organic chemistry; learning; education 4.0

Full Text:

PDF

References

1. De la Iglesia M. 4.0 Toolkit for teachers in the era of competency evaluations. Innovación Educativa 2019; 19(80): 93–112.

2. Behmke D, Kerven D, Lutz R, Paredes J. Augmented reality chemistry: Transforming 2-D molecular representations into Interactive 3-D structures. Proceedings of the Interdisciplinary Conference on STEM Teaching and Learning. Georgia: Georgia Southern University; 2018.

3. Cai S, Wang X, Feng K. A case study of augmented reality simulation system application in a chemistry course. Computers in Human Behaviour 2014; 37: 31–40.

4. Chen Y. Learning protein structure with peers in an AR enhanced learning environment [PhD thesis]. University of Washington; 2013.

5. Martínez H, García A, Escalona J. Augmented reality models applied to chemistry education on college. Revista Cubana de Quimica 2017; 29(1): 13–25.

6. Hernández J, Pérez C, Reséndiz N. Learning digital skills in high school: interweaving everyday activities with study using digital technologies. Proceedings of the XIV National Congress of Educational Research. San Luis Potosí, Mexico. Mexican Council for Educational Research; 2017.

7. Pérez Y, Chamizo J. Análisis curricular de la enseñanza química en México en los niveles preuniversitarios. Parte II: La educación media superior (Spanish) [Curricular analysis of chemistry education in Mexico at pre-university levels. Part II: Upper secondary education]. Educación Química 2016; 27: 182–194.

8. Merino C, Pino S, Meyer E, et al. Augmented reality for teaching-learning design in chemistry. Educación Química 2015; 26(2): 94–99.

9. Da Silva M, Teixeira J, Cavalcante P, Teichrieb V. Perspectives on how to evaluate augmented reality technology tools for education: A systematic review. Journal of the Brazillan Computer 2019; 25(3): 1–18.

10. Ministère de L’Économie et des Finances [Internet]. Prospective: Industrie du futur-Secteurs de la chimie et du papier-carton: amélioration des outils de production eta apport du númerique (French) [Prospective: Industry of the future-Chemical and paper-cardboard sectors paper and cardboard: Improvement of production tools and the contribution of digital technology]. 2019. Available from: https://www.entreprises.gouv.fr/files/files/directions_services/etudes-et-statistiques/prospective/prospective/chimie/15-03-Chimie-Papier-Rapport-COMPLET.pdf.

11. Nechypurenko P, Starova T, Selivanova T, et al. Use of augmented reality in chemistry education. Memoires of 1st International Workshop on Augmented Reality in Education. Kryvyi Rih: Kryvyi Rih State Pedagogical University; 2018.

12. Nechypurenko P, Semerikov S, Selivanova T, Shenaya T. Information and communication tools for pupils research competence formation at chemistry profile learning. Information Technologies and Learning Tools 2016; 56(6): 10–29.

13. Arloon. Arloon chemistry: AR [Internet]. 2017. Available from:

14. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.Arloon.Chemistry.AR&hl=en_MX.

15. Maier P, Tönnis M, Klinker G. Dynamics in tangible chemical reactions. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology International Journal of Chemical and Molecular Engineering 2009; 3(9): 442–448.

16. StudyMarvel. Immersive chemistry [Internet]. 2016. Available from: http://myvirtualspaceapp.com/.

17. Virtual Space. AR and VR molecules editor free [Internet]. 2017. Available from: http://myvirtualspaceapp.com/.

18. Larngear. Atomic structure AR learning gear [Internet]. Thailand: LarngearTech; 2012. Available from: http://larngeartech.com/products/atomic-structure-ar-learning-gear/.

19. Dáskalos. Dáskalos chemistry: Interactive science teacher for augmented reality [Internet]. Denmark: European Regional Development Fund (ERDF); 2015. Available from: https://prefrontalcortex.de/labs/daskalos/periodicSystem.pdf.

20. Ruiz S. Teaching anatomy and physiology through augmented and virtual realities. Innovación Educativa 2019; 19(79): 57–76.

21. Ruiz R, Ríos M. Incorporation of 3D manipulable models in the subject of Statics in eBooks and augmented reality. Proceedings of the 1st International Congress on Educational Innovation. Mexico City: ITESM; 2014.

22. Suarez F, Gonzalez E. AR-assisted procedural knowledge transfer: Cases of CFM56 stall regulator-valve, RF motor and VR wing assembly. Proceedings of the II International Congress on Educational Innovation. Mexico City: ITESM; 2016.

23. Medina L, Aguilar G, Angelo L, et al. Mathematical visualization with augmented reality: Multivariate calculus. Monterrey: ITESM; 2016.

24. Zárate M, Mendoza C, Aguilar H, Padilla J. Markers for augmented reality for educational purposes. ReCIBE 2013; 2(3): 1–17.

25. Fernandez J. Rubrics for the evaluation of augmented reality projects [Internet]. 2015. Available from: https://es.slideshare.net/JoseLuisFernndez3/rbricas-para-la-evaluacin-de.

26. Neira I, Ibánez M, López M. Validation process of a rubric designed with the socio formative approach. Proceedings of the XIV National Congress of Educational Research. San Luis Potosí: Mexican Council for Educational Research; 2017.

27. Welch S, Comer J. Quantitative methods for public administration: Techniques and applications. Books/Cole Publishing Co: USA; 1988.

28. Celina H, Campo A. Approach to the use of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. Revista Colombiana de Psiquiatria 2005; 34(4): 572–580.

29. SEP. Dirección General de Bachillerato. Programa de estudios: Química II (Spanish) [General Directorate of Baccalaureate. Program of studies: Chemistry II]. Mexico: Subsecretaría de Educación Media Superior; 2017.

30. Dunser A, Billinghurst M. Evaluating augmented reality systems. New York: Springer; 2011.

31. Jiménez Z. Teaching and learning chemistry via augmented and immersive virtual reality. In: Technology integration in chemistry education and research (TICER). Chicago: ACS Publications; 2019.

32. Linowes J, Babilinski K. Augmented reality for developers. UK: Birmingham Packt Publishing; 2017.

33. Sommerauer P, Muller O. Augmented reality in informal learning environments: A field experiment in a mathematics exhibition. Computers & Education 2014; 79: 59–68.

34. Gómez I. Posibiildad didáctica de la realldad aumentada (Spanish) [Educational possibilities of augmented reality] [Internet]. Mexico City: Instituto Politécnico Nacional; 2017. Available from: https://www.ipn.mx/assets/files/innovacion/docs/libros/solo-ensayo/vol-II/Posibilidad-didactica-de-la-Realidad-Aumentada.pdf.

35. Bitner N, Bitner J. Integrating technology in the classroom: Eight keys to success. Journal of Technology and Teaching Education 2002; 10(95): 95–100.

36. Swan J, Gabbard J. Survey of user-based experimentation in augmented reality. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Augmented Reality. Louisiana; 2009.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.54517/met.v1i2.1780
(204 Abstract Views, 0 PDF Downloads)