applied

sciences
Article
Trends and Research Issues of Augmented Reality
Studies in Architectural and Civil Engineering
Education—A Review of Academic
Journal Publications
Pei-Huang Diao and Naai-Jung Shih *
Department of Architecture, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, 43, Section 4, Keelung Road,
Taipei 106, Taiwan; diaoph@msn.cn
* Correspondence: shihnj@mail.ntust.edu.tw; Tel.: +886-02-2737-6718.




Received: 21 March 2019; Accepted: 2 May 2019; Published: 4 May 2019


Featured Application: 1. A systematic review of literature was conducted concerning augmented

reality (AR) in architectural and civil engineering education. 2. AR is discovered to possess a wide
range of applications in general pedagogies and domain-specific learning. 3. The advantages and
challenges of AR in this field are reported. 4. Analysis was performed based on fundamental
information, application domains, AR development tools, system types, teaching devices,
teaching methods, learning strategies, and research methods. 5. Discussions and suggestions
were made regarding the advantages in pedagogies and education, the challenges to systems
and curriculums, the selection of suitable systems, and the emerging trends of AR and building
information modeling (BIM) combined. 6. Collaboration should occur among different roles. The
trends and research have become an integrated and collaboration issue, that should be conducted
interactively with pedagogical findings and resources integrated across different parties.

Abstract: Architectural and civil engineering (ACE) education is inextricably connected to real-world
practice. The application of augmented reality (AR) technology can help to establish a link between
virtual and real-world information for students. Studies of applying AR in ACE education have
increased annually, and numerous research have indicated that AR possesses immense application
potential. To address and analyze pertinent research issues, published studies in the Scopus database
were explored, and revealed that problems persist and are worthy of attention, such as the selection
of system types and devices, the application of research methods, and appropriate learning strategies
and teaching methods. Courses with objective grading standards should be given priority in AR
experimental courses for a meticulous investigation of AR influence on students’ learning outcomes
and ultimately improvement of classroom quality. Suitable types of AR systems should be selected
based on course content, prior to the design and development of the system. It is recommended
to develop markerless systems for a larger application range to benefit students with additional
convenience. Systems can also be accompanied by functions, such as instant online assessments,
synchronized assessments, and exchange capabilities to assist learning what has been taught and
develop critical thinking abilities. The combination of AR and building information modeling
(BIM) in architectural and civil practice, which has immense application potential, has become an
emerging research trend. Collaboration between academics and practice should be enhanced with
roles and knowledge of instructors, engineers, designers, and computer experts integrated for an
optimal connection between general pedagogy and domain-specific learning. Teaching methods
that emphasize “locations”, as well as “roles”, can be adopted in order to create a superior reality
learning environment with diversified learning methods. The trends and research have become an
integration and collaboration issue that should be performed interactively with pedagogical findings,
and resources integrated across roles, fields, and university departments.

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1840; doi:10.3390/app9091840 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1840 2 of 19

Keywords: augmented reality; architecture and civil engineering; interactive learning environments;
teaching/learning strategies; pedagogical issues; mobile technology

1. Introduction
Architectural and civil engineering (ACE) education is a form of practice-based knowledge
delivery, in which subjects are frequently related to the configuration and property of 3D objects.
A construction, such as a building, bridge, or space is usually associated with component information,
such as stress, dimension, materials, assembly, and construction. Building models have been used to
define information from concept design, schematic design, detailed design, construction documentation,
fabrication and assembly, to as-built. It has been a trend to apply different types of simulations to virtual
models for pedagogy or practice needs, evaluations, practice rehearsals, training, and demonstrations
of proposed solutions. Considering professional characteristics in linking the virtual design and the
projected property in the real world, augmented reality (AR) is applied to fulfill educational and
specialized practice needs.
In recent years, AR has sparked widespread attention and discussion in ACE. AR has been defined
in a broad sense as “augmenting natural feedback to the operator with simulated cues” to a more
restricted approach as “a transparent head-mounted display (HMD) allowing a participant’s clear
view of the real world” [1]. Overall, it aims for real and virtual objects in a real environment to be
combined, registered, and interacted in real-time. The definition of AR was then gradually broadened
to apply particular displays and sensors for auditory, tactile, and olfactory modalities [2,3]. For instance,
Irizarry et al. [4] proposed a mobile augmented reality method to increase efficiency and productivity
in facility management. Hou et al. [5] developed an animated AR system for guided assembly tasks to
reduce errors and to augment operational efficiency. Koch et al. [6] proposed a natural marker-based
AR framework that can digitally support facility operators in performing daily on-site maintenance
tasks. Meža et al. [7] used AR to promote users’ understanding of project documentation in various
stages of construction projects. In addition, Chi et al. [8] discussed trends in AR applications for
architecture, engineering, construction, and facility management, anticipating that AR applications
will be further utilized in ACE fields, and to augment productivity, safety, and efficiency.
The traditional tools of pen and paper have been replaced by building information modeling
(BIM) software [7]. The main advantage of BIM is that it can keep tracking the operation of various
projects in a building lifecycle, in order to enhance project productivity and improve communication
efficiency among professional staff [9,10]. Some forward-thinking scholars have begun combining BIM
and AR in architectural and civil practice, with the intention of further tapping into the potential of
BIM. For instance, Park et al. [11] proposed a conceptual framework for proactive construction defect
management using BIM and AR, to reduce and prevent defect occurrence during the construction
process. The majority of studies predicted AR to become the optimal choice for expanding BIM
concepts and methods. [12,13].
Part of traditional education has been conducted in laboratories with experiments in field practice
to shorten the gap between classroom and real tasks, as one of the measurements in pedagogy. Typical
observations should be made to check if knowledge is acquired, motivation is increased, and outcomes
are improved. AR seems to constitute a portable laboratory that can be operated anytime or right next
to the subject, in contrast to the hand-made modeling approach that must be performed in a specific
location with large facilities.
With advancements in technology and support, the development of AR systems has become
much easier. AR is being applied to education, and has led to impressive results [14–18]. Research
on the use of AR in education has increased steadily and offers great insights into learning and
teaching [19]. The employment of AR is attempted to improve classroom quality from kindergarten,
elementary school, secondary school, to universities [20–22]. AR enables students to use 3D synthetic
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1840 3 of 19

objects to augment visual perceptions of target systems or environments [23]. Numerous studies have
also indicated that AR can assist students to better acquire classroom knowledge, improve learning
outcomes, and boost motivation [24,25].
The emergence of AR has provided an opportunity to reform ACE education. Content in the
ACE curriculum is closely linked to the real world, and creating stronger connections with industry
is critical [26,27]. The most important characteristic of AR is its ability to link the virtual and real
worlds [1–3]. Using AR can help students to establish connections of information between virtual
worlds and real worlds more easily, and make abstract 2D knowledge and concepts in original courses
more concrete [28]. Students’ ability to understand and convert information between the virtual world
and the real world is particularly critical in ACE learning processes. Students can inspect the 3D object
from a variety of perspectives to enhance their comprehension [29]. The utilization of AR can also
provide students with the opportunity to learn in the real world, which supersedes pedagogy that is
confined to traditional classroom learning [30].
The research questions (RQ) of the current paper, concerning AR and ACE education, are presented
in Table 1.

Table 1. Research questions concerning applying augmented reality (AR) in architectural and civil
engineering (ACE) education.

RQ1 What are the extant trends? In which courses is AR used more frequently?
RQ2 What are the AR system development programs?
RQ3 What are the common learning strategies, pedagogies, and research methods?
RQ4 What are the advantages and challenges?

2. Research Methods
Papers related to AR in ACE education and published prior to January 1, 2019 were searched,
coded, and analyzed.

2.1. Resources
ACE education possesses domain characteristics under the special nature of engineering history
and practice. Although AR has been applied in education, no systematic analysis has yet been
performed. The development of an AR system can comprise computer science, medical science, and
other fields in a collaborative manner of hardware and software system built-ups. To elucidate relevant
trends and research issues, the selection of an appropriate database needs to be focused on this domain.
The review starts from selecting a specific database, which has a close relation to ACE education.
An analysis is conducted for all of the published studies in the database to the end of December 31,
2018, with the purpose to understand research trends, advantages, and challenges. Scopus seems to be
relatively more focused and related to ACE, with the world’s largest abstract and citation database of
peer-reviewed literature, including scientific journals, covering research topics across all scientific and
technical disciplines. The database also aims to provide references and recommendations of journal
papers for scholars in the future to enhance teaching effects and learning quality.
Journal papers were searched in the Scopus database and filtered through keywords in the paper
title, abstract, or keywords list. The research questions were raised and transferred into coding schemes
from basic information, systems, and challenges. Data analysis and discussion were also performed
afterward. We selected 1299 papers based on certain keywords, including “augmented reality” and
“architecture” or “building” or “engineering” or “construction”, and “education” or “learning” or
“teaching.” Non-journal and non-ACE education related papers were removed. A total of 21 papers
(see Appendix A) were in the final analysis list (Figure 1).
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 19
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1840 4 of 19

TITLE-ABS-KEY ( “augmented reality" )

AND TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "architecture" )
OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "construction" )
OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "building" ) Select the items that Remove 229 Analyze the
OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "engineering" ) are “article” and articles not content of
AND TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "education" ) “articles in press” related to AR and the target
OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "learning" ) n = 250 ACE education items
OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "teaching" ) n = 21
Search in Scopus n = 1299

Figure
Figure 1. Scopus database
1. Scopus database searching
searching steps.
steps.

Many
Many AR-related
AR-related researches
researches contribute
contribute to to ACE.
ACE. TheThe most
most important
important partpart of
of the
the review
review inin the
the
domain-specific field (i.e., ACE) is to ensure that high quality journal papers will be
domain-specific field (i.e., ACE) is to ensure that high quality journal papers will be identified. Aidentified. A variety
of combinations
variety were employed
of combinations to achieve to
were employed thisachieve
goal. Inthis
the goal.
early stage
In theofearly
search, veryoffew
stage journal
search, papers
very few
were found in Scopus using both “architecture” and “civil engineering”
journal papers were found in Scopus using both “architecture” and “civil engineering” asas keywords. To avoid missing
counts
keywords.of papers,
To avoid“civil engineering”
missing counts of was replaced
papers, by engineering”
“civil “engineering”was with keywords
replaced by “construction”
“engineering”
and
with“building”, and with an “or”
keywords “construction” and search. Eventually,
“building”, 21 papers
and with an “or” were retrieved.
search. Eventually, 21 papers were
Over-emphasis of domain-specific studies may lead cross-domain contributions to be ignored.
retrieved.
Although AR studiesof
Over-emphasis in domain-specific
different fields are equally
studies mayimportant and influential,
lead cross-domain domain-specific
contributions studies,
to be ignored.
which have been applied with clear and defined results, would contribute meaningfully
Although AR studies in different fields are equally important and influential, domain-specific to ACE. In this
study, the majority of core topics or courses in the department of architecture
studies, which have been applied with clear and defined results, would contribute meaningfully to and civil engineering
are
ACE.closely
In thisrelated,
study, such as construction
the majority method,
of core topics structure
or courses insystem and analysis,
the department building materials,
of architecture and civil
computer
engineering are closely related, such as construction method, structure systemand
graphics, 3D modeling, etc. This is why certain keywords, such as “urban” and“city”, were
analysis,
excluded, along with numerous other important ones.
building materials, computer graphics, 3D modeling, etc. This is why certain keywords, such as
“urban” and “city”, were excluded, along with numerous other important ones.
2.2. Coding Schemes
CodingSchemes
2.2. Coding schemes are methods of categorizing scientific data [31]. All articles were coded and
analyzed according to the research questions (RQ), and literature were referred in order to determine
Coding schemes are methods of categorizing scientific data [31]. All articles were coded and
coding schemes [19,27,32,33]. The contents and coding schemes of the research questions (RQ) are
analyzed according to the research questions (RQ), and literature were referred in order to
classified into four types (Table 2). For example, in RQ2, it is necessary to separate marker and
determine coding schemes [19,27,32,33]. The contents and coding schemes of the research questions
markerless systems, since the former seems to be evolved from the latter with many tasks simplified.
(RQ) are classified into four types (Table 2). For example, in RQ2, it is necessary to separate marker
The former can even be conducted by directly implanting a 3D model in an environment. It is important
and markerless systems, since the former seems to be evolved from the latter with many tasks
to note that application simplicity gains user support quickly.
simplified. The former can even be conducted by directly implanting a 3D model in an environment.
It is important to note that application simplicity gains user support quickly.
Table 2. Reference and description of the coding scheme.

N Table 2. Reference and description of theCoding

Items codingSchemes
scheme.
1 Basic information Author’s country, region, and year
N Items Coding Schemes
RQ1 Fields or course directions for general pedagogy or
1 2 Basic information
Application domains Author's country, region, and year
domain-specific learning
RQ1 Fields or course directions for general pedagogy or
2 3 Application domains
Development tools Tools or platforms
domain-specific learning
Marker-based or markerless types by triggering mechanisms
RQ2 3 4 Development tools
System types Tools or platforms
in presenting virtual objects
Marker-based or markerless types by triggering
RQ2 4 5 System types
Device types Smartphones, tablets, or laptops
mechanisms in presenting virtual objects
6 Teaching methods Emphasis of roles, locations, or tasks
5 Device types Smartphones, tablets, or laptops
6 7 Teaching methods Peer assessment,
Emphasis issue-based
of roles, locations,learning, synchronous sharing,
or tasks
Learning strategies
or project-based learning [32]
RQ3 Peer assessment, issue-based learning, synchronous
7 Learning strategies Experimental design method, questionnaire survey,
8 Research methods
sharing, or project-based learning [32]
qualitative research method, system development, and
RQ3
Experimental design
document analysis [34]method, questionnaire survey,
8 9 Research methods
Advantages qualitative research
In general pedagogy andmethod, system development,
domain-specific learning and
RQ4 document analysis [34]
10 Challenges In system problems and course issues
RQ4 9 Advantages In general pedagogy and domain-specific learning
Appl. Sci.
Appl. Sci. 2019,
2019, 9,
9, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 55 of
of 19
19

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1840 5 of 19

10
10 Challenges
Challenges In system
In system problems
problems and
and course
course issues
issues

3. Research
3. Research Analysis
Analysis
Analysis was
Analysis was performed
performed on on the
the AR-related
AR-related coding
coding schemes,
schemes, based
based on
on fundamental
fundamental information,
information,
application domains, development tools, system types, teaching devices, teaching methods,
application domains, development tools, system types, teaching devices, teaching methods, learning learning
strategies, and
strategies,
strategies, andresearch
and researchmethods.
research methods.
methods. For
ForFor example,
example,
example, the
the the form
formform of learning
of learning
of learning subject
subject
subject can
can becan bevirtual
be
in 3D in 3D
in 3D models
virtual
virtual
models
models
or or
text-basedtext-based
or text-based notational
notational
notational explanations
explanations
explanations using markers
usingormarkers
using markers or markerless
or markerless
markerless schemas,
schemas, inschemas,
a locationin a
inin location
a the
location in
in
field or
the field
thea field
in or in a classroom,
or in a with
classroom, classroom, with
with
a specific a specific supporting
a specific environment
supporting environment
supporting environment
of hardwareofof hardware
hardware
and software.and software.
and software.

3.1. Basic Information

3.1. Basic Information

Countries
Countries and
and regions
regions of
of the
the first author, who
first author,
author, who applied
who applied AR
applied AR in
AR in ACE
in ACE educational
ACE educational research,
educational research, are
research, are
recorded. The top three countries and regions among the papers are Spain, the United
recorded. The top three countries and regions among the papers are Spain, the United States,
The United States, and
States, and
and
Taiwan(Figure
Taiwan
Taiwan (Figure2).2).
(Figure 2).Relevant
Relevant
Relevant studies
studies have
studies have been
beenbeen
have published
published since
since since
published 2011, indicating
indicating
2011, indicating
2011, that
that thethat the number
overall
the overall
overall
number
of ofhas
papersof
number papers has increased
increased
papers has increased steadily3).
steadily (Figure
steadily (Figure 3).
(Figure 3).

10
10 99

88 77

66

44
22
22 11 11 11

00
Spain
Spain The United
The United States
States Taiwan
Taiwan China
China Malaysia
Malaysia Mexico
Mexico

Figure 2.
Figure 2. The
The number
number of
of studies
studies published
published by
by country
country and regions..
and regions.
regions

55
44 44
44
33 33 33
33
22
22
11 11
11

00
2011
2011 2012
2012 2013
2013 2014
2014 2015
2015 2016
2016 2017
2017 2018
2018

Figure
Figure 3. The number
3. The number of
of studies
studies published
published by year.
by year.
year.

3.2. Application Domains

3.2. Application
Application Domains
3.2. Domains
AR
AR isis widely
widely applied
applied in in ACE
ACE education
education for
for general
general (50%)
(50%) andand domain-specific
domain-specific learning (50%)
learning (50%)
(50%)
AR is widely applied in ACE education for general (50%) and domain-specific learning
(Figure
(Figure 4).
4). Related
Related papers
papers include
include an
an overview
overview of
of academic
academic performance
performance using
using AR,
AR, and
and discuss
discuss how
how
(Figure 4). Related papers include an overview of academic performance using AR, and discuss how
this type
this type of
type of technology
of technology
technology cancan improve
can improve students’
improve students’ 3D
students’ 3Dspatial skills
3D spatial in
spatial skills tools,
skills in geometries,
in tools, representations,
tools, geometries,
geometries, representations, and
representations,
this
graphics
and graphics[24,35]. By
graphics [24,35]. using
[24,35]. By AR
By using to understand
using ARAR to domain-specific
to understand contents
understand domain-specific of textbooks
domain-specific contents
contents of and assignments,
of textbooks
textbooks and
and
and
students
assignments, can reduce
students the cognitive
can reduce gapcognitive
the betweengap academics
between and practiceand
academics in construction,
practice in estimation,
construction,
assignments, students can reduce the cognitive gap between academics and practice in construction,
structure
estimation, analysis,
structure exterior
analysis, wall design,
exterior building
wall design,design,
buildingand assembly
design, [28,36]. The
and assembly
assembly mostThe
[28,36]. applied
most
estimation, structure analysis, exterior wall design, building design, and [28,36]. The most
course
applied is "informatics
course is tools,”
"informaticsfollowed by
tools,” “construction
followed by methods and
“construction materials.”
methods “Informatics
and tool”
materials.”
applied course is "informatics tools,” followed by “construction methods and materials.”
refers to a general
"Informatics tool" computer
tool" refers
refers to tool, such
to aa general as 3D
general computer modeling.
computer tool, Students
tool, such
such as
as 3D can take
3D modeling. this class
modeling. Students to
Students cancreate
can take 3D models
take this
this class
class
"Informatics
for a real representation of an object or a space to improve a student’s 3D spatial skills. The goal of
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 19
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1840 6 of 19
to create 3D models for a real representation of an object or a space to improve a student’s 3D spatial
skills. The goal of the “geometry course” is to learn how to develop skills to understand visual
the “geometry
perception andcourse” is to learn how
spatial expression to develop skills to understand visual perception and spatial
[37,38].
expression [37,38].

 General application of AR knowledge:  Domain-specified application of AR knowledge:

Informatics tool Construction methods and materials
Geometry course Exterior wall designs
Technical assessment 50% 50% History of western architecture
Representation system Primary structure analysis
Engineering graphics Building design and assembly
Graphical and spatial Estimating course

General learning Domain-specific contents

Figure 4. The percentage of application domains.

Figure 4.

Domain-specified
Domain-specified or or general
general applications
applications of of AR
AR knowledge
knowledge vary vary in
in emphasis
emphasis on on aa course
course or or
computer
computer skill.
skill.The
Theformer
former relates to atodomain
relates a domain that that
applies AR technology,
applies in which
AR technology, in awhich
courseanumber
course
is usuallyisgiven
number usuallyunder
given a common name, such
under a common name,as “Construction methodsmethods
such as “Construction and materials”, as part of
and materials”, as
the “interface” using AR to deliver knowledge. The latter relates to a course
part of the “interface” using AR to deliver knowledge. The latter relates to a course that supports that supports other
courses, such such
other courses, as “3D modeling”,
as “3D modeling”, as aascomputer-related
a computer-related skill without
skill withouta aspecific
specific application goal.
application goal.
In general, the latter is usually given in a computer science department related
In general, the latter is usually given in a computer science department related to hardware, to hardware, interface,
or computer
interface, or graphics.
computer A similar course
graphics. A similarcan course
also becan
offered
also by
be aoffered
subject’sbydepartment for more direct
a subject’s department for
learning support.
more direct learning support.
The
The terms
termsused
usedtotoname
nameaacourse
coursecancandiffer byby
differ country,
country,university, andand
university, department.
department. In general, the
In general,
major part of
the major a course
part is similar.
of a course The application
is similar. of AR across
The application of AR departments can be related
across departments or referred
can be related toor
as a fundamental requirement for students to enhance their computer knowledge
referred to as a fundamental requirement for students to enhance their computer knowledge in in general, or as a
skill or tool learned without a specific course in mind, such as an informatics tool,
general, or as a skill or tool learned without a specific course in mind, such as an informatics tool, geometry course,
representation
geometry course, system, engineeringsystem,
representation graphicsengineering
knowledge, graphics
graphical knowledge,
and spatial applications,
graphical and etc.spatial
It can
also be given as an assignment in which a domain-specific subject can be applied
applications, etc. It can also be given as an assignment in which a domain-specific subject can be and learned, such as
construction methods such
applied and learned, and materials, exterior
as construction wall design,
methods history ofexterior
and materials, westernwallarchitecture, primary
design, history of
structure analysis, building design and assembly, etc.
western architecture, primary structure analysis, building design and assembly, etc.

3.3. Development Tools

3.3. Development Tools
AR development involves platforms, interfaces, and tools. Platforms can be smartphone-based or
AR development involves platforms, interfaces, and tools. Platforms can be smartphone-based
PC-based, mobile-based or station-based, wireless or wired, or an HMD or hand-held device. Interfaces
or PC-based, mobile-based or station-based, wireless or wired, or an HMD or hand-held device.
can be hands-on learning or visual enhancement manipulation. The former includes the manipulation
Interfaces can be hands-on learning or visual enhancement manipulation. The former includes the
of structural details. The latter comprises manipulation of instruction or texts. Tools can be off-the-shelf
manipulation of structural details. The latter comprises manipulation of instruction or texts. Tools
packages or software development kit (SDK) at different levels of course involvement for general
can be off-the-shelf packages or software development kit (SDK) at different levels of course
knowledge/experience delivery or customized subject learning, developed by instructors or supporting
involvement for general knowledge/experience delivery or customized subject learning, developed
laboratories. The nature of tools can be used for enhanced fundamental course learning or general 3D
by instructors or supporting laboratories. The nature of tools can be used for enhanced fundamental
operation. Related
course learning or interfaces
general 3D can be either Related
operation. text or with assembly,
interfaces can movement,
be either textor rotation
or with made as a
assembly,
whole or part
movement, orof a set ofmade
rotation 3D geometries.
as a whole or part of a set of 3D geometries.
16 papers, except for five unspecified ones, used existing AR tools or platforms. AR-media TM ,
16 papers, except for five unspecified ones, used existing AR tools or platforms. AR-media
® , and Junaio® are applied most frequently (Figure 5). AR-mediaTM is widely applied, and
TM,
ARToolKit
ARToolKit , and Junaio are applied most frequently (Figure 5). AR-media
® ® TM is widely applied, and
can ®
can be
be combined
combined with
with many
many® types
types of
of3D
3Dmodeling
modelingsoftware.
software. ARToolKit
ARToolKit® is is the
the world’s
world's earliest
earliest AR
AR
open source software. Junaio can be utilized on different system
open source software. Junaio® can be utilized on different system platforms.platforms.
Appl. Sci.
Appl. Sci. 2019,
2019, 9,
9, x1840
FOR PEER REVIEW 77 of 19
of 19
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 19
5 4 4
45 3
4 4
34 2
3
23 1 1 1
2
12
1 1 1
01
0 AR-media™ ARToolKit® Junaio® Layar® Metaio Aumentaty®
String®
AR-media™ ARToolKit® Junaio® Layar® Aumentaty® Creator®
Metaio String®
Creator®
Figure 5. The number of adopted development tools in AR studies for ACE education.
Figure 5. The number of adopted development tools in AR studies for ACE education.
3.4. System Types
3.4. System Types
3.4. System Types
A user normally needs to inspect an object from different elevations or angles in 360 × 360
A
A user
degrees. user normally
Virtual objects
normally needs
needs to to
must inspect
beinspect an object
tracked an fromfrom
in object
order different
to elevations
be different
displayed in aorcorrect
elevations angles in 360 ×in360
or orientation.
angles degrees.
When
360 × 360a
Virtual
virtual objects
object must
is be tracked
superimposed in
in order
a to
physical be displayed
world, in
correct a correct
relative
degrees. Virtual objects must be tracked in order to be displayed in a correct orientation. When a orientation.
location When
should a
be virtual object
maintained
is superimposed
without
virtual drifting
object inafter
a physical
is superimposeda userworld,
moves. correct
in a physical The relative
world, location
system should
actuallyrelative
correct tracks be themaintained
location shouldwithout
configuration drifting
of the
be maintained real
after a user
environment
without drifting moves.
to ensure The
after thatsystem actually
the moves.
a user virtual object tracks the
is placed
The system configuration
accurately
actually of the
or in
tracks real environment
thea correct relative of
configuration to ensure
translation
the real
that
to thethe virtual
former object
location. is
In placed
contrast,accurately
a GPS or or
a in a
compasscorrectcan relative
hardly translation
achieve
environment to ensure that the virtual object is placed accurately or in a correct relative translation thistointhe
a former
precise location.
manner.
In
to contrast,
former a GPS
theMarker-based orAR
location. a compass
and
In canahardly
markerless
contrast, GPSAR orachieve
constitute
a compass thistwoin amajor
can precisecategories
hardly manner.this
achieve of inARa precise
[27]. Markers
manner. are
Marker-based
2D patterns or symbols
Marker-based AR
AR and thatmarkerless
and can be recognized
markerless AR
AR constitute two
two major
by a computer
constitute major categories
system of
of ARAR [27].
[28]. Marker-based
categories [27]. Markers
AR needs
Markers are
are
2D
to patterns
2Didentify or symbols
patternscorresponding
or symbols that that can
markers, be
can be so recognized by
that presupposed
recognized a computer
by a computer system
information
systemcan [28]. Marker-based
[28].beMarker-based
presented. The AR needs
ARmarker
needs
to
to identify
system corresponding
requires
identify an image markers,
corresponding or 2D barcode
markers, so
so that
thatto presupposed information
achieve registration
presupposed information andcan be
be presented.
tracking.
can A difference
presented. The
The marker
exists
marker
system
between requires
the an
simulated image or
scenario2D barcode
and the to
real achieve
one. An registration
image-based
system requires an image or 2D barcode to achieve registration and tracking. A difference exists and tracking.
marker also A difference
separates exists
students
between
from
between the
thesimulated
learning simulated scenario
scenarioand
a real scenario, since
and thethe
a real one.
printed
real An image-based
marker,
one. An which has
image-based marker
to be
markeralso separates
placed
also students
appropriately
separates from
for
students
learning a
registration,
from learning real scenario,
does since
not scenario,
a real a
necessarily printed
appear
since marker, which
in a real
a printed has to
site. Pasting
marker, be
which and placed appropriately
has tearing
to be placedmarkers for registration,
on the surface,
appropriately for
does
which notmaynecessarily
cause appear
damage toin a
an real site.
artifact, Pasting
are and
prohibited tearing
by law markers
registration, does not necessarily appear in a real site. Pasting and tearing markers on the surface, while on the
working surface,
with which
items may
with a
cause
nationaldamage
which may heritage to an artifact,
cause designation. are prohibited
damage to anAlthough artifact, are by law
a real while
scene can
prohibited working
by be with
lawusedwhile items with
as working
a markerwitha national
in aitems heritage
markerless
with a
designation.
approach,
national heritage Although
difficulty may a real scene can be used
be encountered
designation. Although upon
a real asdeviations
a marker
scene canin bea markerless
made to the
used a approach,
as presetmarkerviewinor difficulty may
a insufficient
markerless
be encountered
lighting
approach, conditions. upon deviations made to the preset view or insufficient
difficulty may be encountered upon deviations made to the preset view or insufficient lighting conditions.
Markerless
Markerless
lighting conditions. AR
AR doesdoes notnot require
require marker registration, and
marker registration, and tracking
tracking is more robust
is more robust in in enabling
enabling thethe
realization
realization of
ofmobile
mobile AR.
AR. This
Thisapproach
approach is made
is madeby matching
by matching a model
a
Markerless AR does not require marker registration, and tracking is more robust in enabling the with
model the geometries
with the of
geometries a subject
of a
or an
subject environment
realizationor an to
of environment be
mobile AR. Thisregistered
to be for correct
registered
approach alignment.
for correct
is made 3D attributes
alignment.
by matching of the
3D attributes
a model geometry, which
with theofgeometries can
the geometry, be
of a
categorized
which
subject canor an as environment
be acategorized
type of marker, as can
to abe type fit of
in amarker,
registered realforphysical
can fitscenario
correct in a real
alignment. to reduce
physical thescenario
3D attributes difference to from
of the reducereality
geometry,the
for easier
difference student
from adaption
reality for in the
easier future.
student adaption in the future.
which can be categorized as a type of marker, can fit in a real physical scenario to reduce the
Figure
Figurefrom
difference 66 shows
shows
reality thefordistribution
the distribution
easier student of
of the
the types
typesin
adaption adopted
adopted
the future. in
in each
each study.
study. Fifteen
Fifteen papers
papers adopted
adopted
marker-based
Figure 6 AR
marker-based AR
shows [24,39]
the and
[24,39] and three
three papers
distribution papers
of the used
used markerless
adoptedAR
markerless
types AR in[35,40].
[35,40]. ThreeFifteen
Three
each study. papers papers
papers did not
did not adopted
develop
develop
or
or specify systems
specify systems
marker-based [25,38].
[25,38].and three papers used markerless AR [35,40]. Three papers did not develop
AR [24,39]
or specify systems [25,38].
16 15
16
14 15
14
12
12
10
10
8
68
46 3 3
24 3 3
02
0 Marker-based AR Markerless AR Not stated
Marker-based AR Markerless AR Not stated
Figure 6. The number of studies in each applied AR system.
Figure 6. The number of studies in each applied AR system.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1840 8 of 19

Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 19

3.5. Teaching Devices
3.5. Teaching Devices
A mobile device is usually equipped with a very sensitive gyroscope to record user movement
in order to provide
A mobile devicea is
correct relative
usually location
equipped withbetween the real gyroscope
a very sensitive environment and the
to record virtual
user object.
movement
Different
in order totechnologies, such as
provide a correct visuallocation
relative inertial between
odometrythe (VIO), are also applied
real environment andas
thea virtual
simultaneous
object.
localization and mapping
Different technologies, (SLAM)
such function
as visual to track
inertial locations
odometry in real-time.
(VIO), are also applied as a simultaneous
Most papers
localization adopted(SLAM)
and mapping mobilefunction
devices to
to track
install AR applications
locations (67%) [36,41] (Figure 7 left).
in real-time.
Most papers
Smartphones were adopted most (57%), followed by tablets (Figure 7 right).(67%)
mobile devices to install AR applications Only [36,41] (Figure
one paper used a7
left). Smartphones were adopted
head-mounted display (HMD) [28]. most (57%), followed by tablets (Figure 7 right). Only one paper
used a head-mounted display (HMD) [28].

5% 7%

28%
36%
57%
67%

Mobile devices Not stated HMDs Smartphones Tablets Laptops

7. The
Figure 7. Thepercentage
percentageofofapplied
applied
ARAR teaching
teaching devices.
devices. Left:Left: device
device type,type, Right:
Right: mobile
mobile devicedevice
type.
type.
3.6. Teaching Methods
3.6. Teaching Methods
The essential characteristics of teaching methods comprise placing students in a learning scenario
similar
Theto essential
that encountered in professional
characteristics of teaching practice,
methodsin which roles,placing
comprise locations, and tasks
students in aconstitute
learning
the three basic parts to describe a job. For example, students may
scenario similar to that encountered in professional practice, in which roles, locations, and act like a job inspector, gotasks
to a
construction site, or perform an equipment check. Moreover, three types of AR
constitute the three basic parts to describe a job. For example, students may act like a job inspector, teaching methods exist
in
goACE
to a education
construction [42].site,
Theor first type is an
perform “emphasizes
equipmentthe roles”,
check. in which three
Moreover, students play
types ofdifferent
AR teachingroles
within an AR system and interact with each other through communication
methods exist in ACE education [42]. The first type is “emphasizes the roles”, in which students and discussion. The core
feature is to emphasize interactions between students. The second type
play different roles within an AR system and interact with each other through communication and is “emphasizes the locations”,
in which students
discussion. The core leave the traditional
feature classroom
is to emphasize and go to between
interactions a given location
students. outdoors to usetype
The second AR tois
complete their studies [41,43]. In the third type “emphasizes the task”,
“emphasizes the locations”, in which students leave the traditional classroom and go to a given students use AR to complete
learning tasks in the
location outdoors to form
use AR of atogame or direct
complete communication.
their studies [41,43].Unlike
In thethe other
third typetwo teaching types,
“emphasizes the
there is no grouping or classification of students into different roles,
task”, students use AR to complete learning tasks in the form of a game or direct communication.and most of the studies were
conducted
Unlike the indoors
other two [24,37].
teaching types, there is no grouping or classification of students into different
roles,Fourteen
and mostpapersof theadopted
studies werethe type, emphasize
conducted the task
indoors (Figure 8). Four papers adopted the type,
[24,37].
emphasize the locations. The number of papers that
Fourteen papers adopted the type, emphasize the task (Figure adopted the type,8).emphasizes
Four papersthe roles, was
adopted the zero,
type,
because
emphasize the locations. The number of papers that adopted the type, emphasizes the roles,three
the grading applied for tasks and locations was not found for roles. The remaining was
papers, which are either literature reviews or not categorized, are classified
zero, because the grading applied for tasks and locations was not found for roles. The remaining as “others.” The number of
papers that used the emphasize-the-task teaching method increased from 2011
three papers, which are either literature reviews or not categorized, are classified as “others.” The to 2018 (Figure 9), while
the number
number of otherthat
of papers teaching
used themethods remained relatively
emphasize-the-task stable.
teaching method increased from 2011 to 2018
(Figure 9), while the number of other teaching methods remained relatively stable.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1840 9 of 19
Appl.
Appl. Sci.
Sci. 2019,
2019, 9,
9, x
x FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 9 of
9 of 19
19

14
14
14
14
12
12
10
10
8
8
6
6
4
4
4
4 3
3
2
2
0
0
0
0
Emphasizing
Emphasizing the
the tasks
tasks Emphasizing
Emphasizing the
the locations
locations Emphasizing
Emphasizing the
the roles
roles Others
Others

Figure 8.
Figure 8. The
The number
number of
of studies for each
studies for each teaching
teaching method.
method.

5
5
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
2
2 2
2 2
2
2
2
1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1
1
1

0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
2011
2011 2012
2012 2013
2013 2014
2014 2015
2015 2016
2016 2017
2017 2018
2018
Emphasizing
Emphasizing the
the tasks
tasks Emphasizing
Emphasizing the
the locations
locations
Emphasizing
Emphasizing the
the roles
roles Others
Others

Figure 9. The
Figure 9. The number
number of
of AR
AR teaching
teaching methods
methods by
by year.
year.

3.7.
3.7. Learning Strategies
3.7. Learning
Learning Strategies
Strategies
Project-based
Project-based learning (79%) is the most common learning strategy used by byresearchers (Figure 10).
Project-based learning
learning (79%)
(79%) isis the
the most
most common
common learning
learning strategy
strategy used
used by researchers
researchers (Figure
(Figure
Teachers
10). instruct students to use AR to complete their projects, presentations, and reports involving 3D
10). Teachers
Teachers instruct
instruct students
students to to use
use AR AR toto complete
complete theirtheir projects,
projects, presentations,
presentations, and and reports
reports
virtual
involving models and physical
3D virtual
virtual modelsbuilding models
and physical
physical [17,44]. models
building The second most-used
[17,44]. method
The second
second is peer assessment
most-used method is is
involving 3D models and building models [17,44]. The most-used method
(11%),
peer in which
assessment students
(11%), rate
in AR works
which created
students by
rateother
AR students
works based
created on
by evaluation
other criteria based
students provided on
peer assessment (11%), in which students rate AR works created by other students based on
by teachers.criteria
evaluation A relevant AR case
provided is the curtain
by teachers.
teachers. wall design
A relevant
relevant AR case of campus
case is the buildings,
the curtain
curtain wallfor which
design ofstudents
campus
evaluation criteria provided by A AR is wall design of campus
must comment
buildings, on each
for which
which other’s
students designs
must comment[35]. on
Theeach
other two less-often
other’s adopted
designs [35].
[35]. learning
The other
other two strategies
less-often
buildings, for students must comment on each other’s designs The two less-often
are issue-based learning
adopted and synchronous sharing, in which students discuss an issue related to the
adopted learning
learning strategies
strategies areare issue-based
issue-based learning
learning andand synchronous
synchronous sharing,
sharing, inin which
which students
students
learning
discuss an content
an or interact
issue related
related through
to the
the learningARcontent
in a timely mannerthrough
or interact
interact involvingARdiscussion
timelyand
in aa timely sharing
manner [39,40].
involving
discuss issue to learning content or through AR in manner involving
The number
discussion of papers that adopted project-based learning gradually increased from 2011 to 2018
discussion and and sharing
sharing [39,40].
[39,40]. The
The number
number of of papers
papers that
that adopted
adopted project-based
project-based learning
learning gradually
gradually
(Figure
increased 11). These four learning strategies are defined as peer assessment, synchronous sharing,
increased from from 2011
2011 to to 2018
2018 (Figure
(Figure 11). 11). These
These four
four learning
learning strategies
strategies are
are defined
defined as as peer
peer
issue-based learning,
assessment, synchronous and project-based
synchronous sharing, learning,
sharing, issue-based respectively
issue-based learning,
learning, and [45].
and project-based
project-based learning,
learning, respectively
respectively
assessment,
[45].
[45].
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 19
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1840 10 of 19
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 19
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 19

11%
5% 11%
11%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%

79%

79%
79%
Project-based learning Synchronous sharing Issue-based learning Peer assessment

Project-based
Project-based learning
learning Synchronous
Synchronous sharing
sharing Issue-based
Issue-based learning
learning Peer
Peer assessment
assessment
Figure 10. The percentage of learning strategies.

Figure 10.
Figure 10. The
The percentage
percentage of
of learning
learning strategies.
strategies.
4
3 3
34
4
2 2 3
3 2 3
3
23
3
1 1 1 2
2 2
2 2
2
1 1
12
2
1
1 1
1 1
1 1 1
1
1
01
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2011
2011 2012
2012 2013
Peer 2014
2013assessment
2014 2015 2016
Synchronous
2015 sharing
2016 2017
2017 2018
2018
Issue-based
Peer learning Project-based learning
Peer assessment
assessment Synchronous
Synchronous sharing
sharing
Issue-based
Issue-based learning
learning Project-based
Project-based learning
learning
Figure 11. The number of papers published in learning strategies by year.
Figure 11. The number of papers published in learning strategies by year.
year.
3.8. Research Methods Figure 11. The number of papers published in learning strategies by year.
3.8. Research Methods
3.8.
3.8. Research
ResearchMethods
Research methods of AR in ACE education are three-fold: The experimental design method,
Methods
Research methods
the document of AR inand
analysis method, ACE theeducation are three-fold:
system development The experimental
method. Figure 12 shows design
thatmethod,
86% of
Research
Research methods
methods of
of AR
AR in
in ACE
ACE education
education are
are three-fold:
three-fold: The
The experimental
experimental design
design method,
method,
the 21
document analysis method, and the system development method. Figure
chosen papers adopted the experimental design method. Specifically, students were divided 12 shows that 86%
the
the document
document analysis
analysis method,
method, and
and the
the system
system development
development method.
method. Figure
Figure 12
12 shows
shows that
that 86%
86% of
of
of
intothe 21 chosen papers
experimental groups andadopted
controlthegroups
experimental designtomethod.
in AR courses Specifically,
discuss the benefits and students
influencewere
of
the
the 21
21 chosen
chosen papers
papers adopted
adopted the
the experimental
experimental design
design method.
method. Specifically,
Specifically, students
students were
were divided
divided
divided into experimental
AR [24,34,37,40]. Two papersgroups (9%)andadopted
control groups in AR courses
the document analysisto method
discuss the benefits and
in multiple AR
into
into experimental
experimental groups
groups and
and control
control groups
groups in
in AR
AR courses
courses to
to discuss
discuss the
the benefits
benefits and
and influence
influence of
of
influence
applications,of AR [24,34,37,40].
[25,46]. Only oneTwo papers
paper (5%) (9%) adopted
adopted the document
system analysis
development method the
to explore in multiple
framework AR
AR
AR [24,34,37,40].
[24,34,37,40]. Two
Two papers
papers (9%)
(9%) adopted
adopted the
the document
document analysis
analysis method
method in
in multiple
multiple AR
AR
applications,
in AR system[25,46]. Only one
development paper
[43]. (5%)13
Figure adopted
showssystem
that the development
mainstreamtoresearch
explore the framework
method betweenin
applications,
applications, [25,46].
[25,46]. Only
Only one
one paper
paper (5%)
(5%) adopted
adopted system
system development
development to
to explore
explore the
the framework
framework
AR system development [43]. Figure 13 shows that the mainstream research method
2011 and 2018 is still the experimental design method, and the number of related research projects between 2011 and
in
in AR
AR system
system development
developmentdesign[43]. Figure
Figure 13
[43]. method, 13 shows
shows that
that the
the mainstream
mainstream research
research method between
2018 is still
increases bytheyear.
experimental and the number of related research projectsmethod
increasesbetween
by year.
2011
2011 and 2018 is still the experimental design method, and the number of related research
and 2018 is still the experimental design method, and the number of related research projects
projects
increases
increases by by year.
year.
5%
9%
5%
5%
9%
9%

86%

86%
86%
Experimental design method Document analysis System development

Experimental
Experimental design
design method
method Document
Document analysis
analysis System
System development
development
Figure 12. The percentage of three research methods.

Figure
Figure 12.
12. The
The percentage
percentage of
of three
three research
research methods.
methods.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1840 11 of 19
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 19

5
4
4
3 3 3
3
2
2
1 1 1 1 1
1

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Experimental design method Document analysis System development

Figure 13. The number of papers published in research methods by year.

year.

4. Discussions and
4. Discussions and Suggestions
Suggestions
AR
AR is
is usually
usually considered
consideredas asaanew
newtype
typeofofinterface,
interface,ininwhich
which knowledge
knowledge is is
conveyed
conveyedto to
users in
users
ainvisual or hands-on
a visual or hands-onexperience.
experience.The interaction
The interactionor or
thethe
content is still
content determined
is still determined by by
thethe
design of
design
instructors or experts in a specific domain. The efficiency in delivering knowledge
of instructors or experts in a specific domain. The efficiency in delivering knowledge has been has been improved,
in general, in
improved, and created
general, a unique
and created teaching
a unique and learning
teaching experience.
and learning Suggestions
experience. are made,
Suggestions are and
made,a
discussion is conducted
and a discussion regarding
is conducted the research
regarding questions
the research listed in
questions Table
listed in1.Table 1.
4.1. Promoting the Advantages in General Pedagogies and Domain-Specific Learning
4.1. Promoting the Advantages in General Pedagogies and Domain-Specific Learning
The advantages of using AR in an ACE education curriculum are related to general pedagogies and
The advantages of using AR in an ACE education curriculum are related to general pedagogies
domain-specific learning, with the former mentioned the most. The most frequently cited categories are
and domain-specific learning, with the former mentioned the most. The most frequently cited
the improvement of a student’s interest in learning, performance, and motivation [24,44,46] (Table 3).
categories are the improvement of a student’s interest in learning, performance, and motivation
The most-mentioned domain-specific learning is that the students increased in graphic competencies
[24,44,46] (Table 3). The most-mentioned domain-specific learning is that the students increased in
and spatial skills [47]. The advantages illustrate great potential in combining the attributes of the
graphic competencies and spatial skills [47]. The advantages illustrate great potential in combining
physical with designated information with reasonable arrangements or a direct manipulation without
the attributes of the physical with designated information with reasonable arrangements or a direct
needing to consider where to paste the marker. AR is helpful in completing projects, presentations,
manipulation without needing to consider where to paste the marker. AR is helpful in completing
and reports involving 3D virtual models and physical building models in a unique user interface.
projects, presentations, and reports involving 3D virtual models and physical building models in a
unique user interface.
Table 3. The advantages of AR in ACE education curriculums.

Inductive Categories Table 3. The advantages of AR in ACE education curriculums.

Sub-Categories Quantity Sample Research
Improve students’ learning interest 7 [39]
Sample
Inductive Categories Improve students’Sub-Categories
academic performance. 6 Quantity [24]
Research
Improve
Motivatestudents’
studentslearning
more interest 4 7 [47] [39]
Improve students’ academic performance.
Satisfaction of students with the course 4 6 [48] [24]
General pedagogies Motivate students more 4 [47]
Effective tool in traditional pedagogical settings 4 [36]
Satisfaction of students with the course 4 [48]
Improve students’ course participation 3 [46]
General pedagogies Effective tool in traditional pedagogical settings 4 [36]
Helpful for Improve
knowledge integration
students’ andparticipation
course internalization 1 3 [40] [46]
Helpful
Help students for knowledge
communicate integration
with course andininternalization
contents the classroom 1 1 [39] [40]
Help students communicate with course contents
Improve communication between teachers and students in the classroom 1 1 [37] [39]
Improve communication between teachers and students 1 [37]
Increase graphic competencies and spatial skills 2 [47]
Increase graphic competencies and spatial skills 2 [47]
Great potential to be applied in construction projects 1 [25]
Great potential to be applied in construction projects 1 [25]
Domain-specific
Domain-specific Helpful instructional
Helpful techniques
instructional to learn
techniques structural
to learn analysis
structural analysis 1 1 [49] [49]
learning
learning Improve
Improve students’
students’ understanding
understanding of building
of building roof components 1
roof components 1 [50] [50]
Help students to expand their thinking in building-design processes1
Help students to expand their thinking in building-design processes 1 [17] [17]
Improve the clarity of students’ 3D perception 1 [37]
Improve the clarity of students’ 3D perception 1 [37]

4.1.1. Adopting Teaching Methods That Emphasize Locations and Roles

Teaching methods that emphasize locations, as well as roles, can be adopted in order to create
a superior reality learning environment with a diversified learning method. The experimental
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1840 12 of 19

4.1.1. Adopting Teaching Methods That Emphasize Locations and Roles

Teaching methods that emphasize locations, as well as roles, can be adopted in order to create a
superior reality learning environment with a diversified learning method. The experimental design
method, and the questionnaire and qualitative research methods can be utilized. AR used in ACE
education is extremely uniform in teaching methods. Most papers adopted methods that “emphasize
the task”, and few papers adopted ones that “emphasized the roles” and “emphasize the locations”.
In other words, how and to what level a student solves tasks in an AR scene needs to be supervised as
a way to evaluate learning and systems in fixed locations, such as classrooms or workshops, where
they complete a certain learning task. Although on-location learning can more effectively make use of
students’ prior knowledge, as well as increase their learning interest [51,52], relatively few brought
students to real environments for reality learning. The ideal educational tool should also incorporate
the authentic experience of on-location learning [53]. Future studies are recommended to adopt AR
teaching methods that emphasize the locations. By combining the teaching method with real-life
examples of the practices involved, classroom quality can be improved, and the gap between academics
and practices can be reduced.

4.1.2. Providing Learning Strategies with Objective Grading Standards

Courses with objective grading standards should be given priority in AR experimental courses,
such as architectural history and theory, and environment technology. The goal is to be able to
meticulously investigate the influence of AR on students’ learning outcomes and ultimately improve
classroom quality. Adopting a uniform grading standard is difficult for design-related courses [54].
Teachers in such courses face challenges in determining whether a student’s logical thinking and
aesthetic ability have been enhanced after using AR [17]. Educational institutions and course-grading
standards are crucial to such studies because only by standardizing grading can students’ learning
outcomes be effectively measured [55]. Consequently, it is recommended that future AR courses
formulate assessment criteria that are as clear as possible, or directly choose courses that have existing
and clear assessment criteria, such as environment technology, and architectural history and theory.
In the above-mentioned ways, applying AR in classrooms can be better evaluated, and the quality of
pedagogy can be enhanced.

4.2. Preparing for Challenges

The challenges of using AR in ACE education are two-fold: Curricula and systems. The former
are usually related to the content, form, and timing of courses. The latter are usually associated with
the design, manipulation, equipment, and functions of an AR system. Most papers noted that students
reported that the time for AR operations is too short or the content of the course is too great [17,24,46]
(Table 4). However, Sánchez et al. [35] proposed that students should not spend too much time learning
AR; otherwise, learning difficulty will be increased. AR course design requires careful planning and
distribution of time in AR operations, which is neither too short nor too long. Discussions are more
diffused in system problems, which will be solved as technology advances, such as the difficulty in
creating AR models, the small size of AR device screens, and the low level of system stability [35,47].
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1840 13 of 19

Table 4. AR challenges in ACE education.

Inductive Categories Sub-Categories Quantity Sample Research

Difficult to create AR model or contents 2 [47]
Small and not immersive AR device screen 1 [35]
Systems Lack of system stability 1 [24]
Tired easily after extended holding marker-based AR
1 [49]
mobile device in the air while sliding it
Insufficient study time or too much course content 5 [46]
May increase students’ learning difficulty after using
1 [35]
AR for a long period of time
Can be difficult in design-concept assessment
1 [17]
compared to using AR in a paper-based approach
Curriculums
Difficulty in working simultaneously with AR and
1 [36]
concentrating on the lecture
More effective in a 3D physical model than an AR
model in helping students to understand the 1 [29]
transformation from 2D images to 3D objects

4.2.1. Providing a Reasonable Arrangement of Introduction and Operation

As previously mentioned, the challenge encountered in research from students’ feedback is the
problem of inadequate time for students to operate AR and that the course content is excessive [17,24].
However, students are not supposed to use AR for too long, as it can increase the difficulty in
learning [35]. Cheng et al. [56] suggested that students might experience cognitive overload in an AR
learning environment due to task complexity. An adequate understanding and good preparation for the
course content are requisite in the initial phase of course design. A reasonable arrangement concerning
when to introduce AR and the duration of its use can assist to integrate AR into the classroom more
seamlessly and effectively. It is believed that the quality of the course will then be improved.

4.2.2. Be Aware of Difficulty in Creating AR Contents

Another challenge is related to system development. The most commonly mentioned problem
was the difficulty in creating AR content. Fortunately, many simple AR development tools are available,
such as ARKit® and ARCore® . It is reasonable to believe that this issue will soon be resolved by
providing an efficient software interface to create 3D models, code AR SDK, and design interfaces.
In addition, some studies reported that, due to the complex design of the system, students tend to
abuse some of the system functions, and therefore are unable to complete the learning tasks [17].
In light of this, the design of the system should be as simple as possible and free of cumbersome and
superfluous functions, so that teaching contents can be delivered in a more direct manner. A simpler
system design can also enhance system stability to some extent. It is clear that no effort should solely
focus on enriching the functions of AR systems because it may distract students.

4.3. Developing Markerless Systems and Smartphone-Based AR

Suitable types of AR systems should be selected based on course content, prior to the design and
development of the system. It is recommended to develop markerless systems for a larger application
range to benefit students with additional convenience. Systems can be accompanied by functions, such
as instant online assessments, synchronized assessments, and exchange capabilities to help students to
learn what has been taught and develop their critical thinking ability.
The development programs of AR systems are discussed based on three categories: The AR
development tool, the AR type, and the AR teaching device. Most of the ACE education research uses
open source tools to create AR systems, such as AR-mediaTM , ARToolKit® , and Junaio® . The most
selective AR type is the marker-based AR, with less options in developing markerless AR. It is worth
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1840 14 of 19

noting that marker-based AR systems require students to maintain their own position relative to the
markers in order to present virtual information. Consequently, students might feel fatigued after long
operating hours [49]. Similar problems have also been noted in architectural practice. For example,
due to the complexity of construction sites, it can be difficult to place AR markers properly, and system
recognition issues frequently occur [57]. Future research and development should focus on using
markerless AR programs, since markerless AR is considered to be more interactive than marker-based
AR [8,12]. In summary, both the design and arrangement of the marker are crucial in marker-based AR
systems, with problems related to the limitations of distance, environment, and movement (Table 5).
Researchers can select suitable types of systems for future AR development.

Table 5. Limitations of marker-based AR.

Type Description
The distance between a marker and a device’s camera is restricted. Tracking and
Distance positioning of the AR system cannot be performed when the marker is out of the camera’s
range, and appears very small or unidentifiable.
The design and affixation of a marker are subject to environmental limitations. Markers
Environment can hardly be affixed in complicated environments, such as construction sites, waterfronts,
and parks. Environmental aesthetics can be violated by on-site marks.
User movements can be limited, since marker-based AR requires the device camera to scan
Movement
the marker, and retain an orientation or pace for the best virtual information display.

Scholars in the field of architectural engineering have reported that tablet computers and wearable
devices are superior AR devices to smartphones, and will therefore have great potential as hand-held
AR devices [58]. However, smartphones continue to be the most commonly used devices in ACE
education currently. This seems to be a reasonable finding, as smartphones are used ubiquitously by
today’s university students. Compared to other devices, smartphone-based AR can be more convenient
for immediate responses to various occasions [59].

4.4. Combining AR and BIM

AR has been widely applied in military, education, manufacturing, medical, gaming, maintenance,
advertising, and even tourism fields. It is also applied to architecture, in which history, construction,
structure, planning, computer graphics, and other topics are also involved. As a result, it might
be useful to narrow the scope with more focused studies in architecture. We found that general
and domain-specific courses may share a knowledge model of BIM that is currently widely applied.
Identifying and considering this core value can help to organize and address pedagogical and
technical concerns.
To elucidate the trend of applying AR and what are the courses in which AR is used more
frequently, domain-specific courses have revealed a strong connection to the operations and knowledge
of the property and configuration of building-related components. The design, construction method,
structure analysis, assembly, and estimation have created a life-cycle perspective of construction that is
also a complicated system. BIM associates architectural components from level of development or
detail (LOD) 100 to 500 with attributes and physical dimensions designated in design, construction,
fabrication, and management for quality control or cost estimation. The level of development or
detail (LOD) 100 to 500 refers to the stages of concept design (100), schematic design (200), detailed
design (300), construction documentation (350), fabrication and assembly (400), and as-built (500),
respectively [60,61]. The operational subject of AR has contents described under the category of
BIM. A great similarity exists with it concerning how AR works on subjects. However, few studies
have combined BIM with AR in ACE education. A possible reason for this is that universities are
unable to provide students with a working environment that allows actual operation, and therefore
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1840 15 of 19

BIM is used more frequently as a 3D modeling tool in teaching, but not for joint applications with
other technologies.

5. Conclusions
One of the most important issues of this study is the inclusion of “education” as a keyword to meet
the scope of this review. Engineering features, such as mechanics, which will surely be included in an
“engineering” search, may find very limited papers along with the search of “education.” Cross-domain
studies can be found in the sub-fields of architecture, ACE, different university departments, or even
professional practices. However, the numbers after the cross-domain search were refined to include
pedagogy, which concerns teaching methods and learning strategy. In the future, cross-domain
applications that originated from novel fields should also be explored from a pedagogical point of
view to accelerate AR’s deployment in academics as a top-down approach. Eventually, the bottom-up
pedagogical effort made in universities can be interacted with the approach in two ways.
ACE education is inextricably connected to real-world practice. The application of AR technology
can help to establish a link between virtual and real-world information for students. This is a critical
and effective contribution. Studies have increased annually, many of which have indicated that AR
possesses immense application potential. Nevertheless, some problems persist and are worthy of our
attention, such as the selection of system types and devices, the application of research methods, and
appropriate learning strategies and teaching methods.
AR needs to involve collaborative efforts from different fields. An integrated learning environment
is requisite for related-courses, students, instructors, laboratories, and departments. With AR systems,
which used to be prepared by computer specialists, it can be difficult for instructors to create AR contents
with only an ACE or education background. Creating an AR system includes a series of preparatory
works, from creating 3D models, defining interrelationships between modeling components, format
conversion, host AR device adaption, and designing interfaces. System design comprises a thorough
consideration of interfaces and a time-consuming effort in creating 3D models. Every part of a system
contributes to classroom efficiency and effectiveness, and should be thoroughly planned in advance.
It is often easier to use off-the-shelf AR tools with lower entry requirements. This issue will soon be
extended to course customization and periodic version updates. Courses with laboratory support
are superior because the efficiency of research and pedagogy can be integrated. An instructor can
also update the course with sufficient software and hardware support. It is certainly more difficult to
prepare from the beginning using SDK or by instructors alone.
Collaboration should occur among different roles. Students from different departments may
present various knowledge and learning specialties. For example, a student with an ACE background
may have to expend more effort to make the best of an AR system, although it might be easier to
build models because the subject used is embedded in department courses. Representation of physical
objects, however, remains a skill that has to be learned or be familiar to computer experts. Instructors
will clearly face more challenges in preparing AR-supported courses. Not only does the delivered
course media have to be 3D-modeled, but also the interrelation in between has to be defined, not just
in text, but also in a scenario created through a proper computer interface with buttons for selective
display or instructions. ACE expert knowledge should also be represented for pedagogy purposes.
The trends and research in AR studies in ACE education have become an integration and
collaboration issue, which should be conducted interactively with pedagogical findings, and hopefully
with resources integrated across university departments, laboratories, professional training centers,
research centers, system providers, and firms with real projects outside of campus.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, methodology, formal analysis, and resources were made by both
authors. Data curation and writing—original draft preparation was made by P.-H.D. Writing—review and editing,
supervision, and project administration was made by N.-J.S.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1840 16 of 19

Appendix A
1. Abdullah, F.; Kassim, M.H.B.; Sanusi, A.N.Z. Go virtual: Exploring augmented reality application
in representation of steel architectural construction for the enhancement of architecture education.
Adv. Sci. Lett. 2017, 23, 804–808. doi:10.1166/asl.2017.7449.
2. Ayer, S.K.; Messner, J.I.; Anumba, C.J. Augmented Reality Gaming in Sustainable Design
Education. J. Archit. Eng. 2016, 22. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)AE.1943-5568.0000195.
3. Behzadan, A.H.; Kamat, V.R. Enabling discovery-based learning in construction using telepresent
augmented reality. Autom. Constr. 2013, 33, 3–10. doi:10.1016/j.autcon.2012.09.003.
4. Chen, Y.-C.; Chi, H.-L.; Hung, W.-H.; Kang, S.-C. Use of tangible and augmented reality
models in engineering graphics courses. J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract. 2011, 137, 267–276.
doi:10.1061/(ASCE)EI.1943-5541.0000078.
5. Chu, H.-C.; Chen, J.-M.; Hwang, G.-J.; Chen, T.-W. Effects of formative assessment in an augmented
reality approach to conducting ubiquitous learning activities for architecture courses. Univers.
Access Inf. Soc. 2017, 1–10. doi:10.1007/s10209-017-0588-y.
6. Fonseca, D.; Martí, N.; Redondo, E.; Navarro, I.; Sánchez, A. Relationship between student
profile, tool use, participation, and academic performance with the use of Augmented Reality
technology for visualized architecture models. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 31, 434–445.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.03.006.
7. Fonseca, D.; Redondo, E.; Villagrasa, S. Mixed-methods research: A new approach to evaluating
the motivation and satisfaction of university students using advanced visual technologies. Univers.
Access Inf. Soc. 2105, 14, 311–332. doi:10.1007/s10209-014-0361-4.
8. Fonseca, D.; Redondo, E.; Valls, F. Motivation and academic improvement using augmented
reality for 3D architectural visualization. Educ. Knowl. Soc. (EKS) 2016, 17, 45–64.
doi:10.14201/eks20161714564.
9. González, N.A.A. Development of spatial skills with virtual reality and augmented reality. Int. J.
Interact. Des. Manuf. (IJIDeM) 2018, 12, 133–144. doi:10.1007/s12008-017-0388-x.
10. Navarro, I.; Fonseca, D. New visualization technologies to improve the representation of
architecture in education. Archit. City Environ. 2017, 12, 219–238. doi:10.5821/ace.12.34.5290.
11. Redondo, E.; Sánchez, A.; Moya, J.; Regot, J. The city as a digital classroom. Teaching urbanism
and architecture through mobile learning and augmented reality technologies. Feasibility and
study case. Archit. City Environ. 2012, 7, 27–54. doi:10.5821/ace.v7i19.2560.
12. Redondo, E.; Fonseca, D.; Sánchez, A.; Navarro, I. Mobile learning in the field of Architecture and
Building Construction. A case study analysis. Int. J. Educ. Technol. Higher Educ. 2014, 11, 152–174.
doi:10.7238/rusc.v11i1.1844.
13. Redondo, E.; Sánchez, A.; Fonseca, D.; Navarro, I. Geo-Elearning for urbanprojects. New
educational strategies using mobile devices. A case study ofeducational research. Archit. City
Environ. 2014, 8, 100–132. doi:10.5821/ace.8.24.2714.
14. Sánchez, A.; Redondo, E.; Fonseca, D. Geo-located teaching using handheld augmented
reality: Good practices to improve the motivation and qualifications of architecture students.
Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 2015, 14, 363–374. doi:10.1007/s10209-014-0362-3.
15. Shanbari, H.; Blinn, N.; Issa, R.R.A. Using augmented reality video in enhancing masonry and
roof component comprehension for construction management students. Eng. Constr. Archit.
Manag. 2016, 23, 765–781. doi:10.1108/ECAM-01-2016-0028.
16. Shirazi, A.; Behzadan, A.H. Design and assessment of a mobile augmented reality-based
information delivery tool for construction and civil engineering curriculum. J. Prof. Issues Eng.
Educ. Pract. 2015, 141. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)EI.1943-5541.0000229.
17. Shirazi, A.; Behzadan, A.H. Content delivery using augmented reality to enhance student’s
performance in a building design and assembly project. Adv. Eng. Educ. 2015, 4. 1–24.
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1840 17 of 19

18. Turkan, Y.; Radkowski, R.; Karabulut-Ilgu, A.; Behzadan, A.H.; Chen, A. Mobile augmented reality
for teaching structural analysis. Adv. Eng. Inf. 2017, 34, 90–100. doi:10.1016/j.aei.2017.09.005.
19. Uribe, F.C. Increased reality applied to the teaching of the descriptive geometry. AUS 2015, 18,
18–22. doi:10.4206/aus.2015.n18-04.
20. Vassigh, S.; Davis, D.; Behzadan, A.H.; Mostafavi, A.; Rashid, K.; Alhaffar, H.; Elias, A.; Gallardo,
G. Teaching Building Sciences in Immersive Environments: A Prototype Design, Implementation,
and Assessment. Int. J. Constr. Educ. Res. 2018, doi:10.1080/15578771.2018.1525445.
21. Wang, T.-K.; Huang, J.; Liao, P.-C.; Piao, Y. Does Augmented Reality Effectively Foster Visual
Learning Process in Construction? An Eye-Tracking Study in Steel Installation, Adv. Civ. Eng.
2018, 12. doi:10.1155/2018/2472167.

References
1. Milgram, P.; Takemura, H.; Utsumi, A.; Kishino, F. Augmented reality: A class of displays on the
reality-virtuality continuum. In Proceedings of the Telemanipulator and Telepresence Technologies, Boston,
MA, USA, 31 October–1 November 1994; Volume 2351, pp. 282–292. [CrossRef]
2. Azuma, R.T. A survey of augmented reality. Presence-Teleoper. Virtual Environ. 1997, 6, 355–385. [CrossRef]
3. Azuma, R.; Baillot, Y.; Behringer, R.; Feiner, S.; Julier, S.; MacIntyre, B. Recent advances in augmented reality.
IEEE Comput. Graphics Appl. 2001, 21, 34–47. [CrossRef]
4. Irizarry, J.; Gheisari, M.; Williams, G.; Walker, B.N. Infospot: A mobile augmented reality method for
accessing building information through a situation awareness approach. Autom. Constr. 2013, 33, 11–23.
[CrossRef]
5. Hou, L.; Wang, X.; Bernold, L.; Love Peter, E.D. Using animated augmented reality to cognitively guide
assembly. J. Comput. Civil Eng. 2013, 27, 439–451. [CrossRef]
6. Koch, C.; Neges, M.; König, M.; Abramovici, M. Natural markers for augmented reality-based indoor
navigation and facility maintenance. Autom. Constr. 2014, 48, 18–30. [CrossRef]
7. Meža, S.; Turk, Ž.; Dolenc, M. Measuring the potential of augmented reality in civil engineering. Adv. Eng.
Software 2015, 90, 1–10. [CrossRef]
8. Chi, H.-L.; Kang, S.-C.; Wang, X. Research trends and opportunities of augmented reality applications in
architecture, engineering, and construction. Autom. Constr. 2013, 33, 116–122. [CrossRef]
9. Vanlande, R.; Nicolle, C.; Cruz, C. IFC and building lifecycle management. Autom. Constr. 2008, 18, 70–78.
[CrossRef]
10. Hartmann, T.; Gao, J.; Fischer, M. Areas of Application for 3D and 4D Models on Construction Projects.
J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2008, 134, 776–785. [CrossRef]
11. Park, C.-S.; Lee, D.-Y.; Kwon, O.-S.; Wang, X. A framework for proactive construction defect management
using BIM, augmented reality and ontology-based data collection template. Autom. Constr. 2013, 33, 61–71.
[CrossRef]
12. Utaberta, N.; Hassanpour, B.; Bahar, M.A. An evaluation of criteria-based assessment and grading in
architecture design. Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2013, 5, 346–352. [CrossRef]
13. Meža, S.; Turk, Ž.; Dolenc, M. Component based engineering of a mobile BIM-based augmented reality
system. Autom. Constr. 2014, 42, 1–12. [CrossRef]
14. Kaufmann, H.; Schmalstieg, D.; Wagner, M. Construct3d: A virtual reality application for mathematics and
geometry education. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2000, 5, 263–276. [CrossRef]
15. Kaufmann, H.; Schmalstieg, D. Mathematics and geometry education with collaborative augmented reality.
Comput. Graphics 2003, 27, 339–345. [CrossRef]
16. Billinghurst, M. Augmented reality in education. New Horizons Learn. 2003, 12. Available
online: http://www.durhamnc.gov/agendas_new/2015/cm20150302/10290_CONTRACT_E202_CONTRACT_
ATTACHMENT__365760_627078.PDF (accessed on 3 May 2019).
17. Ayer, S.K.; Messner, J.I.; Anumba, C.J. Augmented reality gaming in sustainable design education. J. Archit.
Eng. 2016, 22, 04015012. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1840 18 of 19

18. Ibrahim, A.; Huynh, B.; Downey, J.; Höllerer, T.; Chun, D.; donovan, J.O. Arbis pictus: A study of vocabulary
learning with augmented reality. IEEE Trans. Visual Comput. Graphics 2018, 24, 2867–2874. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
19. Akçayır, M.; Akçayır, G. Advantages and challenges associated with augmented reality for education:
A systematic review of the literature. Educ. Res. Rev. 2017, 20, 1–11. [CrossRef]
20. Yilmaz, R.M. Educational magic toys developed with augmented reality technology for early childhood
education. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 54, 240–248. [CrossRef]
21. Martín-Gutiérrez, J.; Fabiani, P.; Benesova, W.; Meneses, M.D.; Mora, C.E. Augmented reality to promote
collaborative and autonomous learning in higher education. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 51, 752–761.
[CrossRef]
22. Cai, S.; Wang, X.; Chiang, F.-K. A case study of augmented reality simulation system application in a
chemistry course. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 37, 31–40. [CrossRef]
23. Wang, T.-K.; Huang, J.; Liao, P.-C.; Piao, Y. Does augmented reality effectively foster visual learning process
in construction? An eye-tracking study in steel installation. Adv. Civ. Eng. 2018, 12. [CrossRef]
24. Fonseca, D.; Redondo, E.; Villagrasa, S. Mixed-methods research: A new approach to evaluating the
motivation and satisfaction of university students using advanced visual technologies. Univers. Access
Inf. Soc. 2015, 14, 311–332. [CrossRef]
25. Redondo, E.; Fonseca, D.; Sánchez, A.; Navarro, I. Mobile learning in the field of Architecture and Building
Construction. A case study analysis. Int. J. Educ. Technol. Higher Educ. 2014, 11, 152–174. [CrossRef]
26. Glasser, D.E. Reflections on Architectural Education. J. Archit. Educ. 2000, 53, 250–252. [CrossRef]
27. Wang, X.; Kim, M.J.; Love, P.E.D.; Kang, S.-C. Augmented Reality in built environment: Classification and
implications for future research. Autom. Constr. 2013, 32, 1–13. [CrossRef]
28. Behzadan, A.H.; Kamat, V.R. Enabling discovery-based learning in construction using telepresent augmented
reality. Autom. Constr. 2013, 33, 3–10. [CrossRef]
29. Chen, Y.-C.; Chi, H.-L.; Hung, W.-H.; Kang, S.-C. Use of tangible and augmented reality models in engineering
graphics courses. J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract. 2011, 137, 267–276. [CrossRef]
30. Kamarainen, A.M.; Met alalf, S.; Grotzer, T.; Browne, A.; Mazzuca, D.; Tutwiler, M.S.; Dede, C.; et al.
EcoMOBILE: Integrating augmented reality and probeware with environmental education field trips.
Comput. Educ. 2013, 68, 545–556. [CrossRef]
31. Huberman, M.; Miles, M.B. The Qualitative Researcher’s Companion; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2002.
32. Hwang, G.-J.; Tsai, C.-C. Research trends in mobile and ubiquitous learning: a review of publications in
selected journals from 2001 to 2010. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2011, 42, E65–E70. [CrossRef]
33. Palmarini, R.; Erkoyuncu, J.A.; Roy, R.; Torabmostaedi, H. A systematic review of augmented reality
applications in maintenance. Rob. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 2018, 49, 215–228. [CrossRef]
34. Johnson, B.; Christensen, L. Educational Research: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches; Allyn & Bacon:
Boston, MA, USA, 2000.
35. Sánchez, A.; Redondo, E.; Fonseca, D. Geo-located teaching using handheld augmented reality: Good
practices to improve the motivation and qualifications of architecture students. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 2015,
14, 363–374. [CrossRef]
36. Shirazi, A.; Behzadan, A.H. Design and assessment of a mobile augmented reality-based information delivery
tool for construction and civil engineering curriculum. J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract. 2015, 141, 04014012.
[CrossRef]
37. Uribe, F.C. Increased reality applied to the teaching of the descriptive geometry. AUS 2015, 18, 18–22. [CrossRef]
38. González, N.A.A. Development of spatial skills with virtual reality and augmented reality. Int. J. Interact.
Des. Manuf. (IJIDeM) 2018, 12, 133–144. [CrossRef]
39. Shirazi, A.; Behzadan, A.H. Content delivery using augmented reality to enhance student’s performance in a
building design and assembly project. Adv. Eng. Educ. 2015, 4, 1–24.
40. Chu, H.-C.; Chen, J.-M.; Hwang, G.-J.; Chen, T.-W. Effects of formative assessment in an augmented reality
approach to conducting ubiquitous learning activities for architecture courses. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 2017,
1–10. [CrossRef]
41. Redondo, E.; Sánchez, A.; Fonseca, D.; Navarro, I. Geo-Elearning for urbanprojects. New educational
strategies using mobile devices. A case study ofeducational research. Archit. City Environ. 2014, 8, 100–132.
[CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1840 19 of 19

42. Wu, H.-K.; Lee, S.W.-Y.; Chang, H.-Y.; Liang, J.-C. Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented
reality in education. Comput. Educ. 2013, 62, 41–49. [CrossRef]
43. Redondo, E.; Sánchez, A.; Moya, J.; Regot, J. The city as a digital classroom. Teaching urbanism and
architecture through mobile learning and augmented reality technologies. Feasibility and study case.
Archit. City Environ. 2012, 7, 27–54. [CrossRef]
44. Fonseca, D.; Redondo, E.; Valls, F. Motivation and academic improvement using augmented reality for 3D
architectural visualization. Educ. Knowl. Soc. (EKS) 2016, 17, 45–64. [CrossRef]
45. Lai, C.-L.; Hwang, G.-J. High school teacher’s perspectives on applying different mobile learning strategies
to science courses: The national mobile learning program in taiwan. Int. J. Mob. Learn. Organ. 2015, 9,
124–145. [CrossRef]
46. Navarro, I.; Fonseca, D. New visualization technologies to improve the representation of architecture in
education. Archit. City Environ. 2017, 12, 219–238. [CrossRef]
47. Fonseca, D.; Martí, N.; Redondo, E.; Navarro, I.; Sánchez, A. Relationship between student profile, tool
use, participation, and academic performance with the use of Augmented Reality technology for visualized
architecture models. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 31, 434–445. [CrossRef]
48. Abdullah, F.; Kassim, M.H.B.; Sanusi, A.N.Z. Go virtual: Exploring augmented reality application in
representation of steel architectural construction for the enhancement of architecture education. Adv. Sci. Lett.
2017, 23, 804–808. [CrossRef]
49. Turkan, Y.; Radkowski, R.; Karabulut-Ilgu, A.; Behzadan, A.H.; Chen, A. Mobile augmented reality for
teaching structural analysis. Adv. Eng. Inf. 2017, 34, 90–100. [CrossRef]
50. Shanbari, H.; Blinn, N.; Issa, R.R.A. Using augmented reality video in enhancing masonry and roof component
comprehension for construction management students. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2016, 23, 765–781. [CrossRef]
51. Squire, K.; Klopfer, E. Augmented Reality Simulations on Handheld Computers. J. Learn. Sci. 2007, 16,
371–413. [CrossRef]
52. Klopfer, E.; Squire, K. Environmental Detectives—The development of an augmented reality platform for
environmental simulations. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2008, 56, 203–228. [CrossRef]
53. Rosenbaum, E.; Klopfer, E.; Perry, J. On Location Learning: Authentic Applied Science with Networked
Augmented Realities. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 2007, 16, 31–45. [CrossRef]
54. Hassanpour, B.; Utaberta, N.; Tahir, M.M.; Abdullah, N.A.G.; Spalie, N.; Che-Ani, A.I. Developing sustainable
approach in architectural education: Lesson from critique session experience of architecture studio program.
In Proceedings of the Ninth WSEAS International Conference on Education and Educational Technology
(EDU’10), Iwate Prefecture University, Japan, 4–6 October 2010; pp. 325–331.
55. Cheng, K.-H.; Tsai, C.-C. Affordances of Augmented Reality in Science Learning: Suggestions for Future
Research. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 2013, 22, 449–462. [CrossRef]
56. Zhou, Y.; Luo, H.; Yang, Y. Implementation of augmented reality for segment displacement inspection during
tunneling construction. Autom. Constr. 2017, 82, 112–121. [CrossRef]
57. Kwon, O.-S.; Park, C.-S.; Lim, C.-R. A defect management system for reinforced concrete work utilizing BIM,
image-matching and augmented reality. Autom. Constr. 2014, 46, 74–81. [CrossRef]
58. Carmigniani, J.; Furht, B.; Anisetti, M.; Ceravolo, P.; Damiani, E.; Ivkovic, M. Augmented reality technologies,
systems and applications. Multimedia Tools Appl. 2011, 51, 341–377. [CrossRef]
59. Diao, P.-H.; Shih, N.-J. MARINS: A Mobile Smartphone AR System for Pathfinding in a Dark Environment.
Sensors 2018, 18, 3442. [CrossRef]
60. AIA. AIA Document E202–2008: Building Information Modeling Protocol Exhibit. AIA Contract Document
Series E202, Washington, DC. 2008; p. 9. Available online: http://www.durhamnc.gov/agendas_new/2015/
cm20150302/10290_CONTRACT_E202_CONTRACT_ATTACHMENT__365760_627078.PDF (accessed on
3 May 2019).
61. Leite, F.; Akcamete, A.; Akinci, B.; Atasoy, G.; Kiziltas, S. Analysis of modeling effort and impact of different
levels of detail in building information models. Autom. Constr. 2011, 20, 601–609. [CrossRef]

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).