Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
FrancoAngeli Journals

Articles/Articoli

Vol. 15 No. 2 (2024): Artificial Intelligence in Schools and University Education: Risks and Opportunities

A.T.E.N.A.: Augmented Tools for Enhancement of Neural Activation. Variety of teaching styles and consistent effectiveness of augmented reality in didactics

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/ess2-2024oa18454
Submitted
settembre 10, 2024
Published
2025-01-31

Abstract

A.T.E.N.A. is a research project launched in January 2023, aimed at exploring the impact of augmented reality (AR) in didactic by harnessing the synergy between human potential and the generative artificial potential that enabled its creation. A.T.E.N.A. is grounded in a solid theoretical framework that integrates the principles of constructivism and Embodied Cognition. The use of AR through smartphones makes the method particularly effective for engaging digital natives, creating learning conditions anchored to their reality. Additionally, manipulating AR models stimulates motor cortex activation, fostering a more immersive and interactive learning experience. Following the positive results of the A.T.E.N.A. methodology on learning processes, the influence of the teacher’s teaching style on outcomes was investigated. The data revealed that, despite varying teaching styles, student performance was not negatively affected, with a 40% improvement in memory tests compared to the control group. Thus, A.T.E.N.A.’s approach has proven to be effective regardless of the teaching style adopted by the instructor, enabling students to improve their performance.

References

  1. Adu E. O., Galloway G. (2015). The effects of cooperative learning on students’ economics achievement and attitude towards economics. Journal of Economics, 6(1): 30-36. DOI: 10.1080/09765239.2015.11885014.
  2. Ahmad S., Rahmat M., Mubarik M., Alam M., and Hyder S. (2021). Artificial Intelligence and Its Role in Education. Sustainability. Sustainability, 13(22). DOI: 10.3390/su132212902.
  3. Bakti I. K., Zulkarnain Yarun A., Rusdi Syaifudin M., and Syafaq H. (2023). The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Education: A Systematic Literature Review. Jurnal Iqra’: Kajian Ilmu Pendidikan. DOI: 10.25217/ji.v8i2.3194.
  4. Bower M., Howe C., McCredie N., Robinson A., and Grover D. (2014). Augmented Reality in Education ‒ Cases, Places and Potentials. EMI Educ. Med. Int, 51: 1-15.
  5. Chassignol M., Khoroshavin A., Klimova A., and Bilyatdinova A. (2018). Artificial intelligence trends in education: A narrative overview. Procedia Comput. Sci., 136: 16-24.
  6. Chen L., Chen P., and Lin Z. (2020). Artificial Intelligence in Education: A Review. IEEE Access, 8: 75264-75278. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988510.
  7. Chen Y.; Wang Q.; Chen H.; Song X.; Tang, H.; Tian M. (2019) An Overview of Augmented Reality Technology. J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 1237: 1-5.
  8. Cipollone E., Lembo L., Morsanuto S., and Peluso F.C. (2023). A.T.E.N.A.: Embodied Theory in Augmented Reality Applied in Didactics. Journal of Inclusive Methodology and Technology in Learning and Teaching, 3(4). DOI: 10.32043/jimtlt.v3i4.
  9. Cipollone E., Lembo L., Oliva P., and Peluso Cassese F (2023) Augmented Didactic: an interdisciplinary approach to assessing augmented reality in learning. Pratica - E-learning, 6(3): 83-94.
  10. Cipollone E., Lembo L., Oliva P., and Peluso Cassese F. (2023) Augmented Didactic: the potential of Gesture in Mobile Learning to enhance learning. Springer Communications in Computer and Information Science (CCIS) series, printing.
  11. Davies J., Ferguson J. (1997). The Staffordshire Evaluation of Teaching Styles: A New Approach to Monitoring Teaching Effectiveness. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 22(1): 43-52.
  12. Dey A., Billinghurst M., Lindeman R.W., and Swan E. (2018). A Systematic Review of 10 Years of Augmented Reality Usability Studies: 2005 to 2014. Front. Robot. AI, 5, 37.
  13. Doulik P., Skoda J., and Simonova I. (2017). Learning styles in the e-learning environment: the approaches and research on longitudinal changes. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 21(4): 417-434.
  14. Gafoor K. A., Babu H. (2012). Teaching style: A conceptual overview. Teacher education in the new millennium, 55-69.
  15. Garzón J., Pavón J., and Baldiris S. (2019) Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Augmented Reality in Educational Settings. Virtual Real., 23: 447-459.
  16. Garzón J. (2021) An Overview of Twenty-Five Years of Augmented Reality in Education. Multimodal Technol. Interact., 5, 37. DOI: 10.3390/mti5070037.
  17. Grasha A. F. (1994). A matter of style: The teacher as expert, formal authority, personal model, facilitator, and delegator. College teaching, 42(4): 142-149.
  18. Grasha A. F. (1996). Teaching with Style: A Practical Guide to Enhancing Learning by Understanding Teaching and Learning Styles. Pittsburgh, PA: Alliance Publishers.
  19. Keefe K. W. (1987). Learning style theory and practice. National Association of Secondary School Principals.
  20. Khatibi M., Khormaei F. (2016). Learning and personality: A review. Journal of educational and management studies, 6(4): 82-90.
  21. Kranzler J., Granville Floyd R., and Kilpatrick Demaray M. (2020). Past, present and Future of research in school psychology: the biopsychosocial ecological model as an overarching framework. School Psychology Quarterly, 35(6).
  22. Lembo L., Cipollone E., Morsanuto S., and Peluso Cassese F. (2023) Augmented Didactic: Interacting with 3D Models to Enhance the Memory Systems. Springer (printing).
  23. Lembo L., Cipollone E., and Oliva P. (2023) Augmented Didactic: Augmented Reality for Learning and Motivation through a multidisciplinary approach. Isyde.
  24. Lembo L., Cipollone E., Oliva P., and Monteleone S. (2023). Augumented Didactic: wow effect for learning. Use of Augmented Didactic through qr code to enhance learning process in undergratues. gsdjournal.
  25. Sharma R. C., Kawachi P., and Bozkurt A. (2019). The Landscape of Artificial Intelligence in Open, Online and Distance Education: Promises and Concerns, 14: 1-2.
  26. Vijaya Kumari S. N. (2014). Constructivist Approach to Teacher Education: An Integrative Model for Reflective Teaching. Journal on Educational Psychology, 7(4): 31-40.
  27. Williamson M. F., and Watson R. L. (2007). Learning styles research: Understanding how teaching should be impacted by the way learners learn part III: Understanding how learners' personality styles impact learning. Christian Education Journal, 4(1): 62-77.
  28. Williamson M. F., and Watson R. L. (2006). Learning styles research: Understanding how teaching should be impacted by the way learners learn. Christian education journal, 3(1): 27-42.
  29. Zhang L. F. (2004). Thinking styles: University students' preferred teaching styles and their conceptions of effective teachers. The Journal of Psychology, 138(3): 233-252.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...