1. A study on real/virtual
relationship through mobile
augmented reality applications
Pier Giuseppe Rossi1, Laura Fedeli1,
Annarita Bramucci1, Marco Polci2
1
University of Macerata , Italy
2
“Dante Alighieri” Institute, Macerata, Italy
Learning & Teaching with Media & Technology
March, 7-9 2013 - Genoa, Italy

2. AR: the evolution
“any case in which an otherwise real environment is
'augmented' by means of virtual (computer
graphic) objects” (Milgram, Kishino, 1994).
“any system that 1) combines real and virtual, 2)
is interactive in real time, and 3) is registered in
three dimensions” (Azuma, 1995).
A conceptual issue that needs a new reference
taxonomy: the relationship between real and
virtual and the clarification of the processes of
interrelation that defines if it’s either the “reality”
or the “virtuality” to be augmented (Milgram and
Colquhoun, 1998).

3. Aim of the research
 To clarify how the evolution of AR, as highlited by
the literature, can be identified in the educational
context and, specifically, in the class work;
 To go deeper in the concept of “mixed reality”.

4. AR in education
The school and the teaching/learning process must
be interpreted also as the opportunity in which
“the cultural practices of the use of mobile devices
and their applications in everyday life need to be
assimilated” (Pachler et al. , 2010, p. 2).
Considering the wider and wider interest in this field
and its application in different educational context
AR apps have been identified in the Horizon Report
2013 as one of the technologies to be fully exploited
in the next 3 years.

5. The research: goals
 To determine if the use of AR applications to be
used in a formal context through mobile devices,
can create new perceptions of the relationship
between real and virtual and, consequently, new
practices in students in primary school.
 To make it explicit the nature of the “mixed reality”
in which the student acts within the continuum
real-virtual and the role played by the context in
such a process.

6. The research framework
The research is framed in a qualitative approach and
adopt a collaborative model . Specifically the
university researchers didn’t develop their
research process on primary school students and
their teacher, but with them.
The collaboration between University and School
takes into account the competence of the teacher in
his context. That competence makes it proper to
assign to the teacher the status of « collaborator »
in the research (Desgagnè, Giddens, Schön).

7. The research questions
 Does the involvement with AR apps modify the
students’ perceptions of “real” and “virtual” and
their relation?
 In what ways?
 What kind of conceptualization of “real”, “virtual”
and their relation do the students have at the end of
the AR project?

8. The participants
The research implied the participation of two classes
of the Primary School “Fratelli Cervi”.
 Both classes are composed by 24 pupils aged 10;
 In both contexts the same teacher was involved as
research collaborator.

9. The AR project
 Applyingthe “point at” app to connect trigger
images to videos
 Both thetrigger image and the video are designed
and created by pupils
 The final products are explored in class with i-
PADs and that experience will be the focus of a
collaborative reflection.

10. Point at

11. Showcase

12. “Point at”: how the app works
The mobile AR app allows the recognition of physical
objects and works as follows:
 Make a digital photo of the object (trigger image)
and convert it with
Qualcomm Vuforia Augmented Reality technology
(trackable image);
 The trackable image is connected to a web resource
(e.g. a video published on YouTube);
 The i-PAD rear camera points at the physical object
and the app makes the connected web resource
open.

13. The research timeline: 1
Preliminary step (December 2012) :
 Clinical interview with pupils;
 Description of AR apps and presentation of the aims of
the class project;
 Negotiation of the macro topics to be addressed in each
class and organization of the work in small groups.

14. The research timeline: 2
“Hands on” step (January /February 2013):
 First approach with audio and video editing free
software;
 Storyboarding and video construction in small groups.

15. The research timeline: 3
Final step (February 2013):
 Conversion of the trigger images and connection with
the videos published online;
 Experimentation of the app using i-PADs in class;
 Final clinical interviews with pupils.

16. The data: 1
Preliminary step
 Students seems to perceive a clear separation between “real”
and “virtual”: “virtual stuff is like another life” “the daily life is
real, the computer life is virtual”
 AR is a vague concept, a sort of “mixture” between what
students call “reality” and what they identify as “technology”

17. The data: 2
“Hands on” step
 The two classes worked with a different modality (topic
based groups, friendship based goups)
 The creation of the video project fostered students:
 Be a group in which each member helps and contribute
in reaching a quality final product
 explore the web to find meaningful resources, select
them and take into account the privacy and copyright
issues
 Improve their expertise in the use of software.

18. The data: 3
Final step
Students report that:
 the work done to create the video is “real”
 “Real” is what you actually “do”, so the exploration activity
and editing activities are perceived as “real”
 the AR app let users take advantage of an an added value:
the “real” trigger image can be clarified (because enriched)
by the video

19. Conclusion
The experimentation produced a reflection on the multiple
dimensions of the connection between real and virtual.
The perception of “reality” seems to be consistent with the potential
of action on the world (I’m creating something) and its
perception (I can touch it).
The AR project seems to have had a role in stimulating a reflection
on the nature of information both in the real world and in the
virtual one.
The whole process created a serendipitous exploration by the pupils
in different directions (personal, interpersonal and related to the
subject matter).
While the AR app works in the same way of a QR code, trigger
objects seems to have a different conceptual value in an
educational perspectives, they work as conceptual nodes.