Co-Design of Augmented Reality Games for Learning with Teachers: A Methodological Approach

Augmented Reality (AR) and Game-Based Learning (GBL) are two approaches that have been used by researchers and developers in recent years to provide enhanced learning experiences (Fotaris et al., 2017; Pellas et al., 2019). On the one hand, AR is the superimposing of a virtual layer of information over the real world. Given the characteristics of AR technology, when it is integrated into the learning process it boosts the learning experience by creating many different learning benefits and opportunities (Bacca et al., 2014; Diegmann et al., 2015).

On the other hand, we consider GBL as the use of games with learning aims, considering a game for learning as defined by Steinkuehler and Squire (2014, p. 11), who based their definition on Thai et al (2009) as “…a voluntary activity structured by rules, with a defined outcome and feedback (e.g., points) that facilitates reliable comparisons of in-player performances…[that] target the acquisition of knowledge as its own end…”. GBL is based on the fact that games have certain characteristics that allow for “playful learning” (Klopfer et al., 2009) which in turn offers benefits such as improving motivation, encouraging learning from failure, supporting problem-solving among others (Gee, 2008; Klopfer et al., 2009).

In this study we consider that the next innovative step in the use of these technologies has come through the amalgamation of both approaches. This union, which will be referred to simply as Augmented Reality Game-Based Learning (ARGBL) (Fotaris et al., 2017; Pellas et al., 2019; Tobar-Muñoz et al., 2015, 2017), is defined as using games for learning by applying AR technologies. ARGBL seems to be a natural development because AR learning experiences may benefit from the more interactive and problem-based approach that games for learning have, and games for learning may benefit from the augmented experiences that enhance the real world. In the same way, GBL proposes that students benefit from many properties such as the emotional and motivational aspects of achieving in-game goals, the rewarding sense, the structuring of the activity via rules that can be used by students in order to learn and perform, among other advantages such as those listed by Gee in his work (Gee, 2005). On the other hand, AR is an immersive technology that allows students to experience by first hand visual aspects of learning objects and experiment with them in their own context using 3D and multimedia capabilities of mobile and desktop devices (Diegmann et al., 2015). For instance, an ARGBL in a biology class could be a 3D game with the AR visualization of an animal cell with the goal of feeding it and making it move by using the cell’s organelles functions in a videogame fashion.

In order to bring these experiences to the classroom, more and more, they have to be created and implemented. However, currently there is a gap between the developers, who would like to bring these experiences to the classroom, the teachers, who are not aware of the characteristics of such experiences, and the students, who would be the final users. This gap has to be closed to successfully bring educational innovations, such as ARGBL games, to the classroom. This gap enacted the following research question which is addressed in this paper:

In this paper, a method for the Co-Design of ARGBL experiences is described, applied, and validated. In the section “background”, we outline the background of studies, paradigms and other frameworks which were considered before we proposed our method. Next, the method we developed is briefly described, followed by the two case studies where the method was applied are described. Then, the validation of the method is shown and, finally, we show the discussion, conclusions, and future work of this study.

Interest in the field has been growing even to the extent that many systematic reviews have been conducted exploring the use of ARGBL. The study conducted by Weerasinghe et al (2019) studied how 30 ARGBL games were used in studies from 2006 to 2017 linking their properties to learning theories such as constructivism and humanism with positives outcomes. Furthermore, Tobar-Muñoz et al (2017) conducted a review analyzing 27 instances of ARGBL in many disciplines (mainly on Science learning) and mostly going from elementary education to early upper education. It is also the case for Yu et al (2022) who analyzed 46 studies using ARGBL games for STEM education. And finally, Alper et al (2021) analyzed 53 scientific studies involving the use of ARGBL experiences, also mostly on STEM areas but also for subjects such as History and Native Languages.

Recently, several studies have reported ARGBL experiences with many types of AR and games (Catal et al., 2020; Fotaris et al., 2017; Koutromanos et al., 2015; Laine, 2018; Laine et al., 2016; López-Faican & Jaen, 2020; Nuñez et al., 2008; Ortiz et al., 2018; Tobar-Muñoz et al., 2017) which in many cases show benefits such as improved collaboration and learning retention.

Some studies have reported ARGBL experiences with many types of AR and games (Tobar-Muñoz et al., 2017). For example, ARGBL has been demonstrated through Geo-Located AR (Dunleavy et al., 2008; Klopfer & Sheldon, 2010; Klopfer & Squire, 2008; Rosenbaum et al., 2007; Squire, 2010; Squire & Jan, 2007), Marker-Based Augmented Reality (C.-H. Chen et al., 2015; Gomes et al., 2014; Guenaga et al., 2014; Lin et al., 2011; Marco et al., 2009; Tobar-Muñoz et al., 2014) Image-based (Chen & Chan, 2019), and QR-Code-based AR (Bressler & Bodzin, 2013). Also, ARGBL is an opportunity to propose learning activities using board games such as the one proposed by Lin and Hou (2022) and the one by Li et al (2018), demonstrating how such games improve learning and performance while lowering learning anxiety.

ARGBL has gained attention from the scientific community and most studies suggest that design guidelines should be followed in order to achieve learning and a good implementation in the learning processes. For example, Weerasinghe et al. (2019) proposed four design guidelines that advise designers on aspects such as feedback, collaboration, elements for the real world and modelling the real phenomena. Also, Li et al (2022) proposed eight design guidelines as well, increasing the need for designers to consider them while working on their ARGBL games. These design guidelines suggest that designers must be concerned on the particularities of ARGBL games to propose compelling, playful, and educational ARGBL games, while teachers are the ones capable of understanding the concepts and the subject matter to be taught. Thus, a co-creation method is timely to fill the open issue of relating teachers and professional ARGBL designers.

In this paper, an ARGBL co-creation method is proposed and validated; this method is called Co-CreARGBL. Co-CreARGBL is based on the paradigm of Co-Design for Learning, which is mainly interested in designing new artifacts, in particular, technologies for learning. This paradigm of design is especially interested in involving users, not only those who “lead” or are “creative”, but anyone who is inspired and passionate about participatory design techniques. Consequently, Co-Design for Learning is used to create educational artifacts and innovations. As defined by Penuel et al., (2007, p. 53), Co-Design for Learning is a: “highly-facilitated, team-based process in which teachers, researchers, and developers work together in defined roles to design an educational innovation, realize the design in one or more prototypes, and evaluate each prototype’s significance for addressing a concrete educational need”.

While teachers have already been employing Co-Design when creating learning games, their experiences to date refer to collaborating with their peers and using an authoring tool but not actually working with professional designers (Frossard, 2013). The method proposed here emphasizes the need to include both teachers and designers in the design process. Teachers contribute with their knowledge of their educational environment and designers and developers build the actual artifact.

This study argues for the inclusion of teachers in the process of design as a number of researchers in AR for learning consider that creating AR experiences greatly benefits from collaboration between designers and teachers (Cuendet et al., 2013; Santos et al., 2014). Some new experiences have entered the Co-creation and Augmented Reality for Learning arena such as the work of Bacca et al. () who describes an application, which incorporated inclusive features to support learning in Vocational Education and Training (VET) processes.

As it can be seen, ARGBL experiences have shown to be useful for several learning processes, thus an approach for creating this kind of experiences is of importance.

Co-CreARGBL is a co-design method intended to create ARGBL experiences including the expertise of both, teachers, and designers. Co-CreARGBL has some general characteristics which help to picture what the domain of application of the method is and what its approach is. Co-CreARGBL is a method to guide creative design processes of craftsmanship aimed to create learning artifacts. It is also applied to long processes of design, mediated by dialogue among stakeholders, and guided by design principles.

Co-CreARGBL proposes the use of a set of roles, which have been defined using the high-level approach proposed by the Six-Facets model (Marne et al., 2012). The roles are:

Co-CreARGBL is a three-stage process: training, iterative design, and classroom evaluation. Each stage has a set of suggested activities to be included in the process. Each activity has a set of considerations to be taken while conducting the process.

In order to validate the method, two case studies were conducted. The paradigm applied to the validation process was Design-Based Research (DBR). DBR is “…a series of approaches, with the intent of producing new theories, artifacts, and practices that account for and potentially impact learning and teaching in naturalistic settings.” (Barab & Squire, 2004). With this in mind, a series of interviews were carried out with AR and GBL professional designers and teachers to audit important educational aspects and how ARGBL could impact teaching scenarios. This led to the idea of constructing a method to help them develop ARGBL experiences collaboratively. In the light of this, a conjecture map –a way to describe how the researchers believe a practice can help the educational setting– was proposed (Sandoval, 2014). Table 1 summarizes the conjecture map.

The conjecture map was used to describe the aims of the design experiment. Design iterations helped to refine the method with input from participating Teachers, Researchers and Designers.

The two case studies comprised two teams of teachers working along AR and GBL designers. Bellow, a summary of the participants and their roles in the Co-CreARGBL process is shown.

Each team shows the subject chosen by the Teachers. Teachers were aged varying from 32 to 45 years old. All of them were public-school teachers. None of the teachers had experience with AR and/or GBL.

In the training sessions, the Teachers experimented with AR authoring tools and AR applications from the Google Play Store, as well as a variety of games for learning. Teachers were also introduced to the ATMSG model by Carvalho et al. (2015) and the library it proposes. This model is proposed as guide to follow when creating Serious Games, so it was used as a basis to propose game mechanics during the iterative design stage.

Teachers in Team B work for a school belonging to the Nasa indigenous community in the south-west of Colombia. Teachers agreed to work on a learning objective that could be applied to the subjects belonging to the indigenous culture. Thus, they decided to work on Mother Tongue which refers to the learning of the Nasa Yuwe (the indigenous culture language) and the learning of their traditions.

During the Design Activity, weekly design meetings focused on designing specific parts of the games. Here, Teachers and Designers listed the main augmentable elements that could be found in a classroom, from among which they selected the maps of the Cauca Department for team A and traditional symbols and calendar for Team B. Other augmentable elements included a set of markers for interaction and information retrieval concerning the game elements using relevant imagery chosen by the Teachers. The Teachers and Designers built a small set of paper prototypes (Fullerton, 2008) which consisted mainly on printing the markers-to-be images and specifying some rule testing for the team. When a prototype idea was accepted by the team, its details were then included in a set of design documents. Both teams devised a sub-system in the game allowing the students to retrieve information about the educational content.

The Validation Square (VS) framework (Seepersad et al., 2006) was used to validate the method. The VS framework is used to validate design methods and considers the validation of a method as the process of “… building confidence in the usefulness [of the method] with respect to a purpose” (Seepersad et al., 2006). Unlike other traditional validation processes, it considers validation in a holistic and semiformal way which, as its main authors and other adherents consider, is appropriate to validate design methods that involve aspects difficult to measure and more subjective considerations. Next, a set of Acceptance Conditions (AC), suggested by VS, are shown.

We argue that ARGBL experiences for learning harness the potential of analog and digital gaming offering students with compelling experiences which can be used to both socialize and learn while motivation students. Also, we show that an effective way to create ARGBL games and experiences is to follow a method that guides the work of teachers and professionals’ game and AR developers through a Co-Design approach. As the experiences described here show, following this approach is effective as the teams described here were able to create two ARGBL experiences and take them into the classroom. This was a collaborative effort where teachers participated as designers and other professionals were in charge of a building the ARGBL game; thus, the teachers were not encumbered with the burden of having to build the ARGBL game.

Furthermore, in the literature review conducted there were some constructs such as design models, frameworks and recommendations for creating AR applications for learning. These constructs were considered in the design of the proposed method and include the uses of AR that Santos et al., (2014) report in their studies, the affordances of Cheng and Tsai (2012), and the directions of AR in education by Yuen et al. (2011). These constructs are very similar to the ones for GBL design i.e. often very high level and deal only with general aspects of the AR design of applications. Again, the method proposed here is a consolidation of these constructs to combine AR applications with games and render them useful for the classroom.

In the past, other approaches have been proposed for creating AR and/or games for learning, especially authoring tools (Eldokhny & Drwish, 2021; Frossard, 2013; Lim & Lee, 2013; Lytridis, 2018; Marfisi-Schottman et al., 2010; Mehm et al., 2012; Mellini et al., 2011; Proactive, 2011). However, authoring tools, by nature, create simpler AR or GBL experiences, because they are made for non-expert users such as the Teachers. The Co-Design approach of Co-CreARGBL is different in that it advocates many people from different backgrounds participating in a collaborative effort, which in time allows for more complex experiences. However, this brings to the fore the issue that, while authoring tools may be used in days or weeks, a Co-Design process may take weeks or months, something which may not be desirable for some teachers or institutions. The advantage to Co-Design approaches such as the Co-CreARGBL method is that the complex experiences created can be utilized in other environments such as other subject classes, schools or playgrounds, thus fully exploiting the extra time required to create them. To the extend of our knowledge, no method to relate Teachers and Professional Designers has been proposed, explored, and validated as most studies have focused on creating simple experiences by Teachers. Furthermore, similar methodological approaches to create educational resources have been proposed in the past. However, these approaches are often either too general or do not consider aspects like Co-Design or the particular considerations of AR and/or GBL. Co-CreARGBL is an approach that taps into the particular aspects of ARGBL and aims to be a useful repository of ARGBL principles, properties, and other important considerations in ARGBL design.

The Validation Square (Seepersad et al., 2006) was used as the validation framework for Co-CreARGBL because of the characteristics of its process. This framework was chosen because it considers the validation of the method as a process of building confidence on its usefulness, and it understands usefulness as whether the method provides design solutions correctly and with acceptable operational performances. We argue that this style of validation is the most adequate for a method such as Co-CreARGBL because it does not focus on a strict, objective, or mathematical validation, but rather on a holistic one that considers the validity of the method from several perspectives, all of which have been presented to build confidence in Co-CreARGBL’s validity. Nonetheless, this comes with a drawback because building confidence in the validity of the method greatly depends on the case examples taken into account and while the examples given here have proven to be adequate to be used as example problems to validate the method, they were very specific cases, and thus their generalizability is limited. Moreover, the validation was carried out in naturalistic environments, as opposed to controlled scenarios in laboratory environments. While this may be seen as a drawback, we feel that it is in fact an advantage given the suggestions of Design-Based Research (Barab & Squire, 2004). This approach to research of educational artifacts argues that educational innovations (such as the ones produced by Co-CreARGBL) should be tested in a real environment without excluding the context of the educational environment.

It is important to recognize some limitations of this study. On one hand, the method was built in accordance with the participants, thus, biased answers are expected. Future works should work along blind Teachers, using the method only to guide them in order to find out unbiased answers. As acknowledged in the intended uses of the method, the method proposed is not intended as a one-off rapid method for designing ARGBL experiences but to be used in longer processes, which renders it as not useful for teachers just wanting a simple experience for short-term use in a single class. In this sense, perhaps, an authoring tool is recommended. This feature also places some limitations on the validation study because as the validation was based on case studies, those studies needed to span months, thus, the validation case studies were limited to just two (Team A and B). Results on the studies on motivation and learning gains are also limited, as the groups of students were scarce, and the usage of the experiences was only one in a transversal observation. More data is needed to extract generalizable conclusions. Also, due to limitations of the training program’s funding, the observations in the naturalistic environments were limited to three with a qualitative study with few students, so more experiences like these should be enacted to extract further conclusions on the validity of the method.

This paper has outlined an approach to the Co-Design of Augmented Reality Games for Learning named Co-CreARGBL. It also has shown a validation process conducted with two case studies where teachers and game design and AR professionals built ARGBL games and experiences that were then tested in real classrooms.

The method was applied into two case studies. These case studies were used as example problems in a validation process that used the Validation Square as the framework for validating Co-CreARGBL as a design method.

Implications for theory, methodology and pedagogical practice.

Building on the previous arguments and the evidence presented, we argue that this has implications for future research. On one hand, researchers and practitioners are presented with a validated and effective approach on how to design, produce and introduce Augmented Reality Experiences with Games and Board games into the classroom. The complexity of the results is, as the results suggest, explained by the dialogical nature of a method that involves teachers and designers alike. Also, according to the answers by teachers, such a method allows them (i) to be aware of novel and effective technologies such as games and AR that can help them tackle challenges in the classroom while allowing them to innovate (ii) Such a method helps teachers to be more involved on the pedagogical, didactical, and content-wise elements of the experience rather than on the design and development of the actual artifact. (iii) in a similar sense, professional designers while aware and skilled on the practice of designing and developing are rarely aware of pedagogical and contextual aspects.

Results on our design experiments following the Design-Based Research, suggest that this is a useful paradigm when researchers want to explore not only some variables in a controlled context, but when they want to assure that the natural noise of the classroom is involved in the use of the learning artifact. According to this, implication on methodologies for future practitioners include (i) the inclusions of teachers and students early on the design process does benefit the complexity and educational effectiveness of the learning artifact (ii) the iterative nature of design and testing helps designers to improve sequential increments on the artifact being created.

Finally, our results suggest that, as some authors have noted in the past (Hargreaves, 1994; Morales, 2019) educational innovation such as ARGBL should involve important actors such as teachers, school and innovations centers which include collaborative methods to improve the educational practice. The examples presented here and the Co-CreARGBL method are in support of such methods, that adequately adapted may be used to co-create other technological and pedagogical innovations apart from AR and GBL.

This said, future work could include using the method with other ARGBL parameters. For example, other technologies and types of AR and games can be used to discern if there are any differences with the ones used in the cases presented here. Moreover, since Co-CreARGBL proposes a set of considerations to be followed when working on its activities, interesting observations may issue from projects using other considerations, frameworks, or design tools.