Navigating an Educational Experience by Augmenting our Reality

Final Master's Thesis project to design an experience to allow visitors to UC Berkeley's campus to access expert perspectives about Strawberry Creek. Advisor: Kimiko Ryokai and Teammate: Deepak Subramanian.

Transcript

1. Navigating an Educational Experience through Augmenting our Reality NEEAR A UC Berkeley School of Information Master’s 2012 Final Project Deepak Subramanian Leslie Tom Advised by: Kimiko Ryokai
2. Challenge How can we design an experience to access expert perspectives about Strawberry Creek at UC Berkeley?
3. Designing a mobile augmented reality experience can invite learners to access information. Technical Augmentations Learner Expert Knowledge Hypothesis
4. Background
5. Situated Learning Knowledge is not fully understood until it is applied to a social or physical context. (Lave and Wenger, 1991)
6. Augmented Reality Overlays information in the physical world.
7. Design Process
8. Observations • Information Access? • Engagement? • Personal Exploration? Tim Pine Environmental Specialist Interviews Observations Recordings Expert Knowledge Learner’s Experience
9. Field / Site Analysis Strawberry Creek UC Berkeley Location Man-Made Site Natural Site
10. Simulating Expert’s Perspective Pointing Engaging Inviting Tim Pine Environmental Specialist
11. Navigating User Experience “learner” Body moves through space to see: ground, creek, sky, etc. calibrate choose resource watch video
12. NEEAR Navigating an Educational Experience by Augmenting Our Reality
14. Navigation Region Detected providing a new space for learning.
15. Navigation Label Aligns to Natural Element providing a new space for learning.
16. Navigation Videos Change Videos providing a new space for learning.
17. Navigation Natural Camera Man-Made providing a new space for learning.
18. Navigation Natural Camera Man-Made providing a new space for learning.
19. Navigation Natural Man-Made providing a new space for learning. Compare Contrast
20. interaction
21. interaction
22. interaction
23. interaction
24. interaction
25. interaction
26. NEEAR Mobile AR tool Vertical Site Comparison Tool
27. Technical Solutions dθ# Accelerometer   •  Determines  the  gravity  vector •  Measure  angle  using  the  rela5ve   change  in  the •  Gravity  vector •  Suffers  from  noise Gyroscope •  Measures  angular  momentum •  Measure  the  angle  by  numerical  integra5on   •  Suffers  from  dri<
28. UI/UX Solutions dθ# Ver/cal  Comparison •  Horizontal  split  screen  model •  Access  changing  resources Informa/on  Overlays •  AR  experience •  Alpha  Channel  overlays
31. Evaluation
32. User Testing Between-Subject Design AR Group Control Group Dynamic AR view Static view same amount of information as the AR group
33. Findings 1 • Increased Curiosity • AR group wanted to learn more about the site • AR asked more questions •“Want to have more fun facts and images (of the site I’m standing at)”
34. Findings 2 • More engagement and connection with the physical site • They are looking at the site more carefully. • “...Each video tells a story about the fragment of the creek.... It helped me to relate where I was looking.”
35. Findings 3 • Personal Exploration: • AR group felt the learning was more personal. • More control over the experience. •“...I like learning privately in a public space.”
36. Future Work • Longitudinal study • Engagement & Learning • Dynamic AR vs. Traditional e-learning tools • Deployment: • Make it available for students, experts, teachers
38. Thanks! Deepak Subramanian & Leslie Tom For more information: www.strawberrycreek.berkeley.edu
39. Thank you Q&A Deepak Subramanian & Leslie Tom For more information: • www.strawberrycreek.berkeley.edu • www.ischool.berkeley.edu