4.5 Article

ARBOOK: Development and Assessment of a Tool Based on Augmented Reality for Anatomy

Journal

JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 24, Issue 1, Pages 119-124

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10956-014-9526-4

Keywords

Anatomy; Augmented reality; Three-dimensional interpretation; Teaching-supporting material; Virtual imaging

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The evolution of technologies and the development of new tools with educational purposes are growing up. This work presents the experience of a new tool based on augmented reality (AR) focusing on the anatomy of the lower limb. ARBOOK was constructed and developed based on TC and MRN images, dissections and drawings. For ARBOOK evaluation, a specific questionnaire of three blocks was performed and validated according to the Delphi method. The questionnaire included motivation and attention tasks, autonomous work and three-dimensional interpretation tasks. A total of 211 students from 7 public and private Spanish universities were divided in two groups. Control group received standard teaching sessions supported by books, and video. The ARBOOK group received the same standard sessions but additionally used the ARBOOK tool. At the end of the training, a written test on lower limb anatomy was done by students. Statistically significant better scorings for the ARBOOK group were found on attention-motivation, autonomous work and three-dimensional comprehension tasks. Additionally, significantly better scoring was obtained by the ARBOOK group in the written test. The results strongly suggest that the use of AR is suitable for anatomical purposes. Concretely, the results indicate how this technology is helpful for student motivation, autonomous work or spatial interpretation. The use of this type of technologies must be taken into account even more at the present moment, when new technologies are naturally incorporated to our current lives.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available