Comp Applic In Engineering - 2020 - Faridi - A framework utilizing augmented reality to improve critical thinking ability

(1)

Comput Appl Eng Educ. 2021;29:258–273.

wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/cae 258

|

S P E C I A L I S S U E A R T I C L E

A framework utilizing augmented reality to improve

critical thinking ability and learning gain of the students in Physics

Harun Faridi | Neha Tuli | Archana Mantri | Gurjinder Singh | Shubham Gargrish

Chitkara University Institute of Engineering and Technology, Chitkara University, Punjab, India

Correspondence

Gurjinder Singh, Chitkara University Institute of Engineering and Technology, Chitkara University, Punjab 140401, India.

Email:[email protected]

Funding information

AR/VR research laboratory of Chitkara University Punjab, India

Abstract

Physics is a branch of science that deals with different properties of energy and matter. Most of the principles of Physics are based on Mathematics, Me- chanics, Optics, Electricity, Magnetism, and Thermodynamics. It is often difficult for students to grasp concepts as they cannot visualize the phenomena, resulting in compounding the problem of lack of interest in STEM subjects.

Augmented reality (AR) can be effective in providing better visualization and interaction with real‐like three‐dimensional virtual objects that can ease the learning experience. In this paper, an AR‐based learning environment is developed to help students understand concepts of the magnetic field, electric current, electromagnetic waves, Maxwell's equations, and Fleming's rules for electromagnetism. An experimental study was conducted to determine the impact of AR intervention on student's learning and critical thinking capabilities. The study was conducted among 80 engineering students, who were distributed into two different groups: the AR teaching group (N= 40) and the conventional teaching group (N= 40). The AR teaching group was instructed through the AR‐based learning environment while the conventional teaching group students were taught using a conventional teaching approach. The experimental results indicate that the AR‐based learning environment has a significant positive impact on the critical thinking and learning gain of the students. The AR experience helped the students in visualizing the abstract concepts of Physics and enhanced their understanding.

K E Y W O R D S

augmented reality, critical thinking, engineering education, learning environment, learning gain

1 | I N T R O D U C T I O N

Traditional teaching is a process when a teacher leads the students to acquire knowledge through recitation techniques and memorization. Conventional methods of teaching are normally based on text, videos, projection,

pen, paper, and two‐dimensional (2D) images in which real‐time learning practice and experience of 3D contents are absent. From recent studies, it has been observed that 3D animated content provides a more immersive experience to the learners. Also with the current change in the pedagogical style of engineering education, learning

(2)

through games, digital platforms, and modern techniques is more beneficial to the students as it raises students’

attention and enthusiasm during the learning activity [32,35]. Augmented reality (AR) has the capability to provide an engaging and interactive learning experience to the students. AR is an experience that augments the real world with virtual components, thereby enhancing the learning experience of the students by super- imposing graphics, videos, text, and audio in the real‐

world scenario [1,21]. The process makes the learning process more tangible and hands‐on, even for abstract content. It is envisaged that by using AR, the students would be able to better achieve learning outcomes through engagement and interactivity with the learning content [3,16,30].

Critical thinking is the process of analyzing the facts and ideas about logical reasoning and decision making skills. This type of thinking is essential for students to solve complex problems in science learning [10,20]. AR‐ based learning media is required for students to think more critically than with other learning media. The students can interact with virtual components by simply drag, drop, grab, and flip operations, which overcome the limitations of the conventional teaching system. Physics is the fundamental subject for engineering courses as it forms a necessary base for most of the concepts and theories of engineering. Sometimes, students found it difficult to imagine the concepts so there is a need for a learning tool that can help students to visualize concepts and phenomena [23]. In this study, an AR application is developed which will help students to understand the concepts of electromagnetism. The AR‐based learning environment (ARLE) is developed by focusing on the following learning objectives:

• To learn by doing instead of reading.

• To get a basic knowledge of abstract concepts in Physics.

• To visualize the phenomena in 3D and interact with virtual objects.

An interactive ARLE is developed that aimed to analyze the impact of AR on the learning gain and critical thinking ability of the students. The main aim of ARLE is to provide the basic knowledge of the behavior of magnetic field lines, current, DC operated motor, and working of a generator in Physics. The magnetic field, current, and force exerted in the current‐carrying conductor plays an important role in the case of the DC motor and generator. It is a mobile application that helps the students to visualize the basic principle of a DC motor, generator, and also enables the students to interact with virtual objects. Additionally, students would be able to

understand the significance of Maxwell's equations like Gauss's law in magnetism. It allows the students to interact with virtual components, such as bar magnet, current‐carrying conductor, galvanometer, and power supply. The ARLE is developed specifically to enhance student's learning and training skills, which will further improve the conceptual understanding, critical thinking ability, and knowledge retaining capabilities of the students [31]. With the help of ARLE, students can experience the fundamental concepts of Physics. The following research questions are addressed in the paper:

1. Is there any impact of AR‐based intervention on the learning gain of the students in comparison with the conventional teaching method?

2. Is there any impact of AR on the critical thinking ability of the students as compared to the traditional teaching method?

This paper is formatted as follows: Section2describes the literature review of AR in the educational field.

Section3represents the methodology to deploy the ARLE system on engineering students and Section 4 describes the result analysis of the ARLE‐based study. Discussion and conclusions are drawn in Section5.

2 | L I T E R A T U R E R E V I E W

AR and virtual reality (VR) are generally applied in education for enhancing the learning experience and knowledge of the students. In the existing literature, numerous research papers have been presented to evaluate the influence of AR on learning skills, engagement, and cognition [6,10,12]. Table1shows the comparison of various existing AR and VR applications in engineering education. The comparison of existing AR and VR applications is done by keeping in mind understanding the design approach and different evaluation techniques for determining the effectiveness of the learning environment. In engineering education, there are several AR/

VR‐based experiences available, but there is limited study in the field of Physics that shows the abstract phenomena to students. AR‐based interaction techniques have been applied to teach the concept of magnetism, but still, they lack in terms of interaction. In the existing research, it was found that the magnetic field has been visualized using the AR technique but still, it is a static experience with no 3D model and real‐time interaction [24]. Dünser et al. [15] taught the basic concept of magnetism in Physics by using hand‐held devices and AR applications, which suggest that AR helps to experience intangible concepts in Physics. Sonntag et al. [34] generated the

(3)

TABLE1Comparisonofvariousexistingapproaches ReferenceTopicApproachStudydesignFindingsEvaluationtechnique Changetal.[10]PrincipleofelectromagnetismAugmentedreality(AR)‐ basedflippedlearning approachforscience projects RandomizedARlearningapproachhassignificantlyimproved thecriticalthinkingability,andstudents learningmotivations

Preandpostknowledgetest Franklin etal.[17]Virtualreality(VR)‐based demonstrationfor electromagnetism

VRenvironmentapproachto learningaboutthe fundamentalofPhysics

CasestudyARandVRtechnologiescanhelpthestudentsto increaselearningmotivationsInteraction‐based performanceanalysisand observation Ozdemir etal.[29]EffectofARonthelearningprocessAR‐basedmobileapplicationCasestudyARhasincreasedstudents’academic achievementandperformanceinScience‐and Engineering‐basededucation

Meta‐analysismethod Özdemir etal.[40]Factoraffectingandproblemsto understandFlemingrulesCasestudyonvarious conceptsofPhysicsCasestudyIthasanalyzedthatstudentsfacingdifficulty understandingtheFlemingrules,toknowthe behaviorofthemagneticfield.Itwasfound thattherearefewstudiesonthe electromagneticconceptsusingAR Theright‐handrule diagnostictestand unstructuredinterview González etal.[18]

Virtuallaboratoryexperienceon thetopicofelectromagnetism VR‐basedmobileapplication approach RandomizedPracticalexperiencesofelectromagnetismand theinteractionofchargedparticleswith electricormagneticfieldswerenotpresentin thisresearchpaper

Saberprostylepreand posttest Choietal.[13]Visualizingelectricfieldand magneticfieldbyusing Mathematica

Vectorfieldapproachin MathematicsCasestudyInthisstudy,itwasfoundthatthereisaneedto visualizethemagneticfieldstogetpractical experienceofthephenomenon

Questionnaireandinterview method Cerratoetal.[8]AstudyonARtoolstomeasurethe spatialabilityofthestudentsAR‐basedstudyapproachCasestudyARtechnologyhasameasurableandpositive impactonstudents’spatialabilitySurveyandQuestionnaire method Astraetal.[2]APhysicsbookequippedwithAR technologythatteachesabout opticalinstruments

AR‐basedlearning applicationtounderstand anopticalphenomenon

RandomizedARhasincreasedstudentperformanceand learningabilityPreandposttestmethod Sirakaya etal.[33]Toidentifystudentsattitudeinthe directionofARARapplicationininquiry‐ basedlearningapproachRandomizedStudentshaveapositiveattitudetowardsARGeneralsurvey‐basedmodel Gusmida etal.[19]LearningmediausingARtoexplain thekinetictheoryofgasesARapproachisusedtoteach theabstractconceptsof Physics CasestudyInthepresentpaper,itwasobservedthathigh‐ schoolstudentsfinditdifficulttounderstand thefundamentalconceptsofPhysicsbecause thereareseveralconceptsinPhysicswhich cannotbeseenwiththenakedeye

Validationtestanalysis

(4)

magnetic induction line virtually and the magnetic model is designed based on the teaching application. Matsutomo et al. [28] further improved the model by distributing and plotting the induction line by using a computer‐generated bar magnet. Ibanez et al. [23] developed an AR application that can efficiently improve the basic understanding of electromagnetic concepts and their phenomena. The author observed that AR applications can help to achieve a higher level of understanding as compared to web‐

based applications. In previous research, several learning‐ based environments, simulations, and games were created by utilizing AR techniques that demonstrate computer‐generated 3D models to the students for learning different and complex topics in a constructive way [11,14,22,26,39]. AR technology also reduces teacher load, making the learning process easier [25]. AR applications can prove to be useful in simulating the complicated theoretical concepts (for e.g., interactive experiment of inquiry‐based microparticles [7]) and difficult to perform experiments (for e.g., convex imaging‐

based experiment [4]).

3 | M E T H O D O L O G Y 3.1 | Participants

Students with an Electrical Engineering background were chosen as a research sample. A total of 80 engineering students participated in the research study. All the participants have no or very little knowledge of AR technology. Table 2presents the participants' details. To avoid the influence of the teacher, the same faculty member taught the class for both groups.

3.2 | Material

The proposed ARLE is a marker‐based learning application that provides interactive and enhanced knowledge about Electrical Engineering concepts like electric motor and generator, electromagnetism, working of the galvanometer, voltmeter, and ammeter, and Gauss's law (i.e., Maxwell equations). It consists of interactive 3D

TABLE1(Continued) ReferenceTopicApproachStudydesignFindingsEvaluationtechnique Martín‐Gutiérrez etal.[27]VRineducationVR‐basedlearningapproachCasestudyARandVRhaveagreatimpactonstudent learningandmotivation.Theseapproaches helptobreaktheboundariesofformal education

Surveymethod Boweretal.[5]ThepotentialofARinengineering educationAR‐basedlearningapproachCasestudyResearchoutcomessuggestedthatARhelpsin increasinglevelsofindependentthinking, creativity,andcriticalthinking Meta‐analysis Wuetal.[38]Tolearnaboutearthandsun,and dayandnightAR,webcamera,andvirtual 3DmodelingRandomizedUsingARitiseasytolearnaboutsolarsystemsPreandposttestmethod

T A B L E 2 Participants details

Gender

AR teaching group

Conventional teaching group

Male 32 34

Female 8 6

Total 40 40

(5)

models of bar magnets, solenoid carrying current, galvanometer, and the closed surface of a sphere, cube, and torus. It uses markers and device cameras for the detec- tion of 3D objects and augmenting virtual objects over that. The 3D models and animations are designed and developed by using Autodesk Maya. The Unity 3D software is used to develop the application using C#. In Figure1 the flowchart of ARLE is shown which defines the arrangement of actions performed throughout the AR system gameplay. As shown in Figure1, AR visualization starts as soon as the camera detects the marker and students can visualize the AR content of a particular learning activity depending upon the type of marker.

Each learning activity has different paper markers.

In the ARLE, students can generate the magnetic field, exert the force in a conductor and change the supply DC voltage by simply clicking the button showing in a developed AR application. They can interchange the position of a bar magnet to observe the behavior of a magnetic field generated by the North and South Pole of the bar magnet. Both audio and video instructions are provided to help students interact with the ARLE. In the user interface of ARLE, there are five options given to learners for selecting the AR learning activity. After selecting the learning activity, the AR view related to the

learning activity appears on the user screen as shown in Figure 2. A second input button corresponds to the generator visualization. By selecting this input, the AR view appears on the user screen as shown in Figure 3.

Similarly, selecting the third and fourth input AR view of

“Maxwell's equation” and “Solenoid carrying current”

appears on the user screen as shown in Figures4and5.

The user would be able to change the voltage supply and experience the effect of change in voltage in the case of the motor as shown in Figure4. Figure 6represents the concept of Gauss's law in magnetism and the magnetic field generated due to the current‐carrying solenoid can be visualized as shown in Figure5. The entire system is developed as a mobile application. The 3D models of a bar magnet, conductor, battery, galvanometer, sphere, cube, and torus are used as game objects. These game objects are operated by C# script, which describes the behavior of gameplay.

3.3 | Experiment design

The learning activity was conducted in a Physics research laboratory. Initially, the students were given a basic in- troduction about the fundamentals of Physics such as the

F I G U R E 1 Flowchart of the AR‐based learning environment. AR, augmented reality

(6)

F I G U R E 2 Augmented reality view for DC motor

F I G U R E 3 Augmented reality view for a generator

F I G U R E 4 Augmented reality view for the Gauss law in magnetism

(7)

Maxwell equations, magnetism, Gauss's law in magnetism, Fleming's rule, the basic principle of motor and generator, and galvanometer in the introductory session to familiarize them with the subject matter. During the introductory session, students were also informed about the process of experimental research. This learning activity is based on voluntary participation, so students participated as per their interest. Also, it was informed to the students that the scores of pretest and posttest would not be considered for the general evaluation of the course. After the introductory session, the students were divided randomly into two groups: the AR teaching group

and the conventional teaching group. The process of the randomized division of students into two groups was ta- ken care of by the faculty member who did not know about the experimental study, thus ensuring complete randomized distribution of students.

After the division of students, a pretest was conducted individually to evaluate the basic knowledge of the phe- nomenon and to check the equal learning ability of both groups on the same subject. In the pretest, students were provided a questionnaire consisting of 15 multiple choice questions related to the subject matter in which they had to answer each question by selecting the correct answer among four. The time limit given to the students to accomplish the pretest was 20 min. The perfect score for the pretest was 15. The AR teaching group con- sisted of 40 students who were trained with the help of ARLE and the conventional teaching group also con- sisted of 40 students who were taught with the conventional lecture‐based approach. To avoid the influence of the teaching style of the teacher, the same teacher taught both the groups. The teacher was aware of the different interventions given to both groups, and the same teacher was in charge of the student's assessment. Throughout the learning procedure, the AR teaching group provided training to understand the principles of the motor and generator, Maxwell's equations, electricity, magnetism, and Fleming's rule using the ARLE approach. The students were also instructed in understanding the behavior of the magnetic field and a current‐carrying conductor with the help of ARLE. Previous studies suggest that it is challenging to know the direction and behavior of magnetic field lines generated due to the current‐carrying solenoid [23,40]. In this study, we overcame this problem by using the ARLE approach as shown in Figure5. The learning activity lasted for 60 min for each group. After the learning activity, the students of both groups were told to take the posttest. The posttest consists of 10 multiple choice questions of 1 mark each and 5 multiple choice questions of 2 marks each with a maximum score F I G U R E 5 Augmented reality view of the solenoid

F I G U R E 6 Experiment design. ARLE, AR‐based learning environment

(8)

of 20. The time limit to complete the posttest was 20 min for both the groups. After the posttest, students were asked to fill the Critical Thinking Questionnaire. Also, the students of the AR teaching group were interviewed to give their feedback and suggestions about the ARLE.

Figure6describes the research design to accomplish the process.

3.4 | Measuring instruments

The measurement instruments used in this study consist of a knowledge test and a Critical Thinking Ques- tionnaire. The knowledge test was used to measure the knowledge of students on the fundamentals of Physics and the Critical Thinking Questionnaire was used to evaluate the critical thinking skills of the students.

The knowledge test was conducted in pretest and posttest design. The pretest was designed to evaluate the student's knowledge before the experiment and the posttest was designed to test the student's knowledge after the intervention. The pretest consists of 15 multiple choice questions with a maximum score of 15 and the posttest consist of 15 multiple choice questions with a maximum score of 20. Both pretest and posttest were designed by the teacher having 6 years of experience in a related field.

Critical thinking is the process of analyzing, synthe- sizing, and evaluating the facts to form a judgment and conclusion. It comprises of Interpretation, Analysis, Evaluation, Inference, And Explanation. The term In- terpretation is used to express the meaning of a variety of experiences, judgments, beliefs, rules, events, and procedures. The analysis is the process of identifying the relationships among concepts, descriptions, statements, and questions. The term Evaluation denotes calculat- ing the credibility of representations, descriptions of a student's perception and experiences. The term Inference denotes identifying reasonable conclusions and forming the hypothesis. The term Explanation denotes presenting the results of particular reasoning. It means to be able to give a picture of concepts to justify that reasoning in

terms of perceptions and experience. The questionnaire for measuring the critical thinking abilities of students was modified from the questionnaire developed by Chai et al. [9]. It consists of six items (like“I will think about whether what I have learned in this learning activity is correct or not”and“In this learning activity, I will try to understand the new knowledge from a different point of view”) and students were asked to respond on 10 point scale ranging from 1 to 10.

4 | R E S U L T S A N D A N A L Y S I S

The data collected from the experimental study were analyzed with the SPSS software to determine the out- come of the study. Before applying a statistical test on the data collected, the normality of data is tested. Table 3 presents descriptive statistics for pretest, posttest, and critical thinking which suggests that data is normally distributed, so an independent sample t‐test can be applied to determine the difference between the two groups.

4.1 | Analysis of knowledge test

Initially, a t‐test was conducted to determine the knowledge of students about the fundamentals of Physics before the experiment. Table4 presentst‐test analysis of the pretest which suggests that there is no significant difference between the mean score of two groups as per thep> .05.

After the experiment, Levene's test was conducted to determine the equality of variances in posttest scores for both groups. The p value of the Levene's test is greater than .05 and with an F‐value of 0.574, which indicates that there is inadequate data to conclude on the difference in variances for the two groups. So, an equal variance was assumed between the groups. Now, at‐test was conducted to determine the difference in knowledge of the two groups after the interventions. Table5 presents the t‐test analysis of posttest scores. The mean value of posttest scores for the AR teaching group is 15.70 and

T A B L E 3 Descriptive statistics of pretest, posttest, and critical thinking

Variable

N Mean SD Variance Skewness Kurtosis

Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic SE Statistic SE

Pretest 80 11.375 3.062 9.377 0.413 0.269 −0.804 0.532

Posttest 80 13.925 3.129 9.792 −0.076 0.269 −0.974 0.532

Critical thinking 80 8.187 1.501 2.256 −0.812 0.269 −0.019 0.532

Abbreviations:SD, standard deviation;SE, standard error.

(9)

that for the conventional teaching group is 12.15 with a p< .05, which suggests that there is a significant difference between the knowledge gain of the two groups.

Cohen'sd value for the posttest is 1.373, which shows a large effect size. From the posttest analysis, it was found that the AR intervention has a great impact on students learning and knowledge development.

4.2 | Analysis of critical thinking ability

Firstly, Levene's test was used to determine the equality of variance in the critical thinking abilities of the two groups. Thepvalue for Levene's test is less than .05 with anF‐value of 8.704, which suggests that the variance is not equal for both the groups. So, an equal variance was not assumed between the groups. Now, a Welch t‐test was conducted to analyze the difference between the critical thinking ability of both the groups. Table 6 presents the Welcht‐test analysis for critical thinking skills.

The mean value of the critical thinking score for the AR teaching group is 8.75 and for conventional teaching, the group score is 7.62 with a p< .05, which indicates that there is a significant difference in the critical thinking abilities of the two groups. Cohen's d value for critical thinking ability is 0.807, which shows a large effect size.

The analysis of the Welch t‐test for critical thinking ability indicates that AR intervention has a positive impact on the critical thinking abilities of the students in learning abstract concepts.

5 | D I S C U S S I O N A N D C O N C L U S I O N

The main motive behind this study was to evaluate the impact of ARLE on student's learning gain and the critical thinking abilities of the engineering students. In this study, an ARLE was developed, which aimed to provide an active learning experience to the students on the T A B L E 4 t‐Test analysis of pretest

Dependent variable Group N Mean SD t df p

95% Confidence interval of the difference

Lower Upper

Pretest AR teaching group 40 11.30 3.039 −0.218 78 .828 −1.521 1.221

40 11.45 3.121

Abbreviations: AR, augmented reality;SD, standard deviation;SE, standard error.

T A B L E 5 t‐Test analysis of posttest

Dependent variable Group N Mean SD t df p Cohen'sd

Lower Upper

Posttest AR teaching group 40 15.70 2.533 6.14 78 .000 1.373 2.398 4.701

40 12.15 2.636

T A B L E 6 Welcht‐test analysis of critical thinking ability

Dependent variable Group N Mean SD t df p Cohen'sd

Lower Upper

Critical thinking ability

AR teaching group 40 8.75 1.103 3.594 68.22 .001 0.807 0.501 1.748

40 7.62 1.643

(10)

fundamentals of electromagnetism. An experimental study was conducted in which students were divided into two groups and provided different teaching interventions.

One group taught with ARLE and others with a conventional teaching approach. The experimental results suggest that ARLE has a positive impact on student's learning gain and critical thinking abilities when compared with the conventional teaching approach. In terms of knowledge, the mean value of the posttest score of the AR teaching group is 15.70 compared to the posttest score of the conventional teaching group is 12.15, which suggests that AR intervention has a significant positive impact on the learning gain of engineering students. Using ARLE, students interacted with 3D virtual content, which provided a visualization of different concepts of Physics.

This helps students to understand the core concepts ea- sily which further enhanced their knowledge retention capabilities and practical learning abilities. These outcomes strengthen the already existing research completed by Ibanez et al. [22], Chang et al. [10], Singh et al. [32].

Besides this, it was observed that there is a difference in the critical thinking abilities of the two groups. The mean value of critical thinking for the AR teaching group is 8.7 and that for the control group is 7.6 which indicates that AR intervention has significantly enhanced the critical thinking ability of students. The main reason for this improvement could be that students were fully engaged with the subject matter during the learning activities that efficaciously enhanced their learning motivation. The students have stated that they visualized the abstract concepts of Physics using ARLE, which helped them to understand the concepts.

ARLE provided an immersive experience to the students through which they were able to visualize the magnetic field, flow of current, and impact of increasing the electric potential. All these abstract concepts are difficult to imagine during conventional teaching, due to which students lose attention in the class. However, while learning with AR, the student can visualize and interact with 3D virtual animated content, which raises the attention, interaction, and motivation of the student [36,37].

Overall, this study supports the fact that AR en- hances the knowledge, attention, and practical skills of the student. Students are excited and motivated to learn through digital teaching platforms and environments.

During this pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019, AR and VR technology can help teachers and academians to develop effective learning environments and provide an immersive learning experience to the students. It takes a lot of time and money for developing an AR/VR learning environment, but academic institutions should help researchers and academians in developing this as it would be a useful resource for students and teachers during online teaching.

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T

The authors would like to thank all the members of the AR/VR Research Laboratory of Chitkara University Punjab, India, who helped in developing the learning environment.

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

O R C I D

Harun Faridi http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3483-3054 Neha Tuli http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1540-5978 Archana Mantri http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1036-3214 Gurjinder Singh http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0108-3042 Shubham Gargrish http://orcid.org/0000-0001- 9251-097X

R E F E R E N C E S

1. H. Altinpulluk,Determining the trends of using augmented reality in education between 2006‐2016, Educ. Inf. Technol. 24 (2019), 1089–1114.

2. I. M. Astra, and F. Saputra, The development of a Physics Knowledge Enrichment Book“optical Instrument Equipped with Augmented Reality” to improve students’ learning outcomes, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.1013(2018), 012064.

3. C. Avilés‐Cruz, and J. Villegas‐Cortez, A smartphone‐based augmented reality system for university students for learning digital electronics, Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ.27(2019), 615–630.

4. R. I. Barraza Castillo, V. G. Cruz Sánchez, and O. O. Vergara Villegas,A pilot study on the use of mobile augmented reality for interactive experimentation in quadratic equations, Math.

Probl. Eng.2015(2015), 1–13.

5. M. Bower, C. Howe, N. McCredie, A. Robinson and D. Grover, Augmented Reality in education—cases, places and potentials, Educ. Media Int.51(2014), 1–15.

6. S. Cai, F.-K. Chiang, Y. Sun, C. Lin and J. J. Lee,Applications of augmented reality‐based natural interactive learning in magnetic field instruction, Interact. Learn. Environ.25(2017), 778–791.

7. S. Cai, X. Wang, and F.‐K. Chiang,A case study of augmented reality simulation system application in a Chemistry course, Comput. Human. Behav.37(2014), 31–40.

8. A. Cerrato, G. Siano, and A. De Marco,Experience augmented reality: From education and training applications to assessment procedures, Qwerty13(2018).

9. C. S. Chai, F. Deng, P. S. Tsai, J. H. L. Koh and C. C. Tsai,Assessing multidimensional students’perceptions of twenty‐first‐century learning practices, Asia Pacific Educ. Rev.16(2015), 389–398.

10. S.‐C. Chang, and G.‐J. Hwang,Impacts of an augmented reality‐ based flipped learning guiding approach on students’scientific project performance and perceptions, Comput. Educ.125(2018), 226–239.

11. K.‐H. Cheng, and C.‐C. Tsai,Affordances of augmented reality in science learning: Suggestions for future research, J. Sci. Educ.

Technol.22(2013), 449–462.

(11)

12. T. H. C. Chiang, S. J. H. Yang, and G.‐J. Hwang, Students’ online interactive patterns in augmented reality‐based inquiry activities, Comput. Educ.78(2014), 97–108.

13. Y. D. Choi, and H. J. Yun,Vector field platform for visualizing electric and magnetic fields in matter using Mathematica, J. Korean Phys. Soc.74(2019), 530–541.

14. Á. Di Serio, M. B. Ibáñez, and C. D. Kloos,Impact of an augmented reality system on students’motivation for a visual art course, Comput. Educ.68(2013), 586–596.

15. A. Dünser, L. Walker, H. Horner and D. Bentall,Creating interactive Physics education books with augmented reality, Proc.

24th Aust. Comput. Interact. Conf. OzCHI 2012.

16. A. Echeverría, M. Améstica, F. Gil, M. Nussbaum, E. Barrios and S. Leclerc, Exploring different technological platforms for supporting co‐located collaborative games in the classroom, Comput. Human. Behav.28(2012), 1170–1177.

17. J. Franklin, and A. Ryder,Electromagnetic field visualization in virtual reality, Am. J. Phys.87(2019), 153–157.

18. J. D. González, J. H. Escobar, H. Sánchez, J. De la Hoz, J. R.

Beltrán, S. M. Arciniegas and L. S. Martínez,Impact of the use of virtual laboratories of electromagnetism in the development of com- petences in engineering students, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.1247(2019), 012018.

19. R. Gusmida, and N. Islami,The development of learning media for the kinetic theory of gases using the ADDIE Model with augmented reality, J. Educ. Sci.1(2017), 1.

20. H. Heflin, J. Shewmaker, and J. Nguyen, Impact of mobile technology on student attitudes, engagement, and learning, Comput. Educ.107(2017), 91–99.

21. K. T. Huang, C. Ball, J. Francis, R. Ratan, J. Boumis and J.

Fordham,Augmented versus virtual reality in education: An ex- ploratory study examining science knowledge retention when using augmented reality/virtual reality mobile applications, Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw.22(2019), 105–110.

22. M.‐B. Ibanez, A. Di-Serio, D. Villaran-Molina and C. Delgado- Kloos, Support for augmented reality simulation systems: The effects of scaffolding on learning outcomes and behavior patterns, IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol.9(2016), 46–56.

23. M. B. Ibáñez, Á. Di Serio, D. Villarán and C. Delgado Kloos, Experimenting with electromagnetism using augmented reality:

Impact on flow student experience and educational effectiveness, Comput. Educ.71(2014), 1–13.

24. F. Mannus, J. Rubel, C. Wagner, F. Bingel and A. Hinkenjann, Augmenting magnetic field lines for school experiments, 2011 10th IEEE Int. Symp. Mix. Augment. Real., IEEE, 2011, pp. 263–264.

25. A. Mart, J. A. Muñoz-Cristóbal, I. M. Jorrín-Abellan, J. I. Asensio- Peréz, A. Martínez-Monés, L. P. Prieto and Y. Dimitriadis, Sup- porting teacher orchestration in ubiquitous learning environments: A study in primary education, IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol.8(2015).

26. J. Martín‐Gutiérrez, P. Fabiani, W. Benesova, M. D. Meneses and C. E. Mora,Augmented reality to promote collaborative and autonomous learning in higher education, Comput. Human.

Behav.51(2015), 752–761.

27. J. Martín‐Gutiérrez, C. E. Mora, B. Añorbe-Díaz and A.

González-Marrero, Virtual technologies trends in education, Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ.13(2017), no. 2, 469–486.

28. S. Matsutomo, T. Miyauchi, S. Noguchi and H. Yamashita, Real‐time visualization system of magnetic field utilizing

augmented reality technology for education, IEEE Trans. Magn.

48(2012), 531–534.

29. M. Ozdemir, C. Sahin, S. Arcagok and M. K. Demir,The effect of augmented reality applications in the learning process: A meta analysis study, Eurasian J. Educ. Res.18(2018), 1–22.

30. S. Park, and C. Kim,Boosting learning‐by‐teaching in virtual tutoring, Comput. Educ.82(2015), 129–140.

31. D. Prit Kaur, A. Mantri, and B. Horan,A framework utilizing augmented reality to enhance the teaching–learning experience of linear control systems, IETE J. Res.2063(2018), 1–10.

32. G. Singh, A. Mantri, O. Sharma, R. Dutta and R. Kaur,Eval- uating the impact of the augmented reality learning environment on electronics laboratory skills of engineering students, Comput.

Appl. Eng. Educ.27(2019), 1361–1375.

33. M. Sirakaya, and E. Kiliç Çakmak,Investigating student attitudes towards augmented reality, Malaysia Online J. Educ.

Tech.6(2018), no. 1, 30–44.

34. D. Sonntag, G. Albuquerque, M. Magnor and O. Bodensiek, Hybrid learning environments by data‐driven augmented reality, Procedia Manuf.31(2019), 32–37.

35. S. Tumkor,Personalization of engineering education with the mixed reality mobile applications, Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ.26 (2018), 1734–1741.

36. Y.‐H. Wang,Using augmented reality to support a software editing course for college students, J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 33 (2017), 532–546.

37. X. Wei, D. Weng, Y. Liu and Y. Wang,Teaching based on augmented reality for a technical creative design course, Comput. Educ.81(2015), 221–234.

38. H.‐K. Wu, S. W.-Y. Lee, H.-Y. Chang and J.-C. Liang,Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education, Comput. Educ.62(2013), 41–49.

39. M.‐T. Yang, and W.‐C. Liao,Computer‐assisted culture learning in an online augmented reality environment based on Free‐Hand Ges- ture Interaction, IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol.7(2014), 107–117.

40. E. Özdemir, and M. Coramik, Reasons of student difficulties with right‐hand rules in electromagnetism, J. Balt. Sci. Educ.17 (2018), 320–330.

A U T H O R B I O G R A P H I E S

Harun Faridihas completed Masters of Technology from Chitkara University, Punjab in the field of Augmented Reality for Engineering Education. He is a Game Development faculty at iNurture Educa- tion Solution. His research interest includes Augmen- ted Reality, Virtual reality in Education, Creative UI/

UX designing and 2D and 3D game development.

Neha Tuli is an Assistant Professor in Chitkara University, Punjab, India. She is PhD in Computer Science and Engineer- ing in the area of Augmented Reality for Early Childhood. Her areas of expertise

(12)

are Serious Educational Games, Augmented Reality/

Virtual Reality in Education, Usability, UI/UX.

Archana Mantri is Vice‐Chancellor of Chitkara University, Punjab, India. She received PhD in Electronics and Commu- nication Engineering with more than 30 years of experience in Research, Develop- ment, Training, Academics, and Administration of Institutes of Higher Technical Education. Her areas of expertise are Project Management, Problem‐and Project‐

Based Learning, Curriculum Design & Development, Pedagogical Innovation and Management. Her areas of interest include Change Management, Education Tech- nology, Cognitive Sciences, Predictive Analysis, Technical Writing, Assessment Technologies, Augmented Reality, and Electronics & Communication Engineering. She is on the board of international experts in Indo‐Universal Collaboration of Engineering Education and advises in the areas of Pedagogical Innovations. She has worked on various contract research assignments in the areas of Innovation Management, Accreditation and Quality Enhancements. Currently, she is supervising several PhD scholars in the areas of Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality. She is a senior member of IEEE.

Gurjinder Singh received his PhD degree in Engineering & Technology from Chitkara University, Punjab, India in 2020. He received his Master's and Bachelor's degree in Electronics and Communication Engineering from Punjab Technical

University, Jalandhar, Punjab, India in 2014 and 2009, respectively. He is an Assistant Professor at Chitkara University, Punjab, India and having more than 10 years of experience in teaching and research.

His research interests include Augmented and Virtual Reality Applications, Human–Computer In- teraction, Human Cognition, Engineering Education, Interactive Learning Environment, and Embedded Systems.

Shubham Gargrish is pursuing her PhD from Chitkara University, Raj- pura, Punjab, in the area of Augmen- ted Reality for School Education. She is an Assistant Professor at the Chit- kara Institute of Engineering and Technology. Her research interests include Embedded Systems, Human–Computer Interaction and Computer Vision.

How to cite this article:Faridi H, Tuli N, Mantri A, Singh G, Gargrish S. A framework utilizing augmented reality to improve critical thinking ability and learning gain of the students in Physics.

Comput Appl Eng Educ. 2021;29:258–273.

https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22342

(13)

A P P E N D I X A : P R E T E S T 1. The direction of the magnetic field

a. Back to front b. Front to Back c. North to South d. South to North

2. The objects are repelled or attracted by one another because of

a. Sound b. Magnetism c. Light d. Air

3. The source of magnetism is

a. Frequency domain b. Split Ring c. Charged Particles d. Magnetic Dipoles

4. The direction of the magnetic force can be determined by using

a. The right‐hand rule b. Right Rotation Rule c. Left rotation rule d. Left‐hand rule

5. The direction of induced current can be determined by using

a. Left rotation rule b. Fleming's rule c. Right‐hand rule d. Left‐hand rule

6. Maximum force appear in a conductor when the conductor is a. Perpendicular to the

magnetic field

b. Parallel to the magnetic field

c. In backward direction

d. All of these

7. The thumb indicates the direction of a. Current b. The motion of the

conductor

c. Magnetic field d. None of these

8. The forefinger represents in fleming left‐hand rule a. Magnetic field b. Current c. The motion of

conductor

d. None of these

9. Electrical energy can be converted into mechanical energy by using

a. Motor b. Windmill c. Generator d. Transformer

10. For which purpose an electrical motor used

a. Electric fans b. Refrigerator c. Washing Machine d. All of these

11. Which device is used to change the direction of current within a circuit

a. Carbon brush b. Coil c. Commutator d. Permanent magnet

12. The carbon strips used to pass electric current to the coil are known:

a. Commutator b. Magnet c. Battery d. Brushes

(14)

13. Draw the magnetic field lines generated due to current‐carrying solenoid Ans:

14. The force appears in a wire placed in a magnetic field increases when a. The current in the

wire increases

b. The strength of the magnetic field increases

c. All of the above d. None of these

15. The amount of magnetic flux through any closed surface is equal to

a. Infinite b. Zero c. Finite d. None of these

A P P E N D I X B : P O S T T E S T 1. ………is a vector quantity

a. Relative permeability b. Magnetic field intensity c. Flux density

d. Magnetic potential

2. A magnetic field exist around a. Iron

b. Copper c. Aluminium

d. Moving charge temporary magnet

3. When an iron piece is placed in a magnetic field

a. The magnetic lines of force will bend away from their usual paths in order to go away from the piece b. The magnetic lines of force will bend away from their usual paths in order to pass through the piece c. The magnetic field will not be affected

d. The iron piece will break 4. Temporary magnets are used in

a. Loud‐speakers b. Generators c. Motors

d. All of the above

5. One Maxwell is equal to……

a. 10 weber b. 12 weber c. 15 weber d. 20 weber

6. Which of these is not a flux unit a. Maxwell

b. Tesla c. Weber

d. All of the above 7. Flux unit is same as

a. Reluctance b. Resistance

(15)

c. Permeance d. Pole strength 8. A permanent magnet

a. Attracts some substances and repels others

b. Attracts all paramagnetic substances and repels others c. Attracts only ferromagnetic substances

d. Attracts ferromagnetic substances and repels all others

9. A coil of wire is placed in a changing magnetic field. If the number of turns in the coil is decreased, the voltage induced across the coil will

a. Increase b. Decrease c. Constant d. None of these

10. Magnetism of a magnet can be destroyed by a. Heating

b. Hammering

c. By inductive action of another magnet d. By all above methods

11. A square cross‐sectional magnet has a pole strength of 1 × 10 Wb and cross‐sectional area of 20 mm × 20 mm. What is the strength at a distance of 100 mm from the unit pole in air?

a. 63.38 N/Wb b. 633.8 N/Wb c. 6,338 N/Wb d. 63,380 N/Wb

12. What will be the current passing through the ring‐shaped air‐cored coil when number of turns is 800 and ampere turns are 3,200?

a. 2 A b. 3 A c. 6 A d. 8 A

13. The diagram shows two poles of a magnet.

Xis the position of a wire carrying a current perpendicularly into the paper.

Which direction does the wire move?

A ↓

B →

C ←

D ↑

(16)

14. A student investigated the behavior of the magnetic effect of a current‐carrying wire and drawn the following graph with experiment results. Write your interpretation of the graph.

15. What is the magneto‐motive force (mmf) of a wire with 8 turns carrying 3 A of current?

a. 2,400 At b. 240 At c. 24 At d. 2.4 At

A P P E N D I X C : Q UE S T I O N N A I R E F O R M E A S U R I N G C R I T I C A L T H I N K I N G A B I L I T Y 1. I will think about whether what I have learned in this learning activity is correct or not.

2. I will judge the value of the new information or evidence presented to me.

3. In this learning activity, I will try to understand the new knowledge from a different point of view.

4. In this learning activity, I will evaluate different opinions to see which one is more reasonable.

5. In this learning activity, I can tell which information is acceptable.

6. During the learning activity, I will identify facts that are supported by evidence.