Teaching Computer Hardware Components, Augmented Reality and Student Motivation:

A Quasi-Experimental Study

Dissertation Manuscript

Submitted to Northcentral University

School of Education

in Partial Fulfillment of the

W
Requirements for the Degree of

DOCTOR OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

IE
by
EV

MICHELLE MARIE CARTER

PR

San Diego, California

November 2022
DocuSign Envelope ID: F33EF308-82C6-4FA8-9E96-FB9EA519F81E

Approval Page

Teaching Computer Hardware Components, Augmented Reality and Student Motivation:

A Quasi-Experimental Study
By

MICHELLE MARIE CARTER

Approved by the Doctoral Committee:

PhD 11/26/2022 | 11:20:28 MST

W
Dissertation Chair: INSERT NAME
Michele Marvel Degree Held Date
IE EdD 11/27/2022 | 07:12:56 MST

Committee Member: Linda

INSERT NAME
Collins Degree Held Date
EV

11/23/2022 | 14:16:02 MST

PhD
PR

INSERT NAME
Committee Member: MICHAEL SHRINERDegree Held Date
 Abstract

The increase in distance learning offerings and the deficit in providing an equivalent engagement

mechanism for haptic subjects for online learners is stimulating educators to seek new

pedagogical methods to meet the needs of the curriculum. A quantitative quasi-experimental

study deploying a two nonequivalent groups design was conducted to examine if Augmented

Reality influenced student motivation in a traditionally hands-on subject, computer hardware

components, for distance learning students. The volunteer sample population, n = 140, were (a)

18 years or older and (b) enrolled in distance Survey of Computer Information Systems course at

the institution of convenience. I crafted four research questions with respective hypotheses

W
employing the tenets of Keller’s Model of Motivation (ARCS) to examine four subfactors related
IE
to student motivation for (a) attention, (b) relevance, (c) confidence, and (d) satisfaction. The

Reduced Instructional Materials Motivation Survey (RIMMS), a 12 question, five-point Likert

EV
scale instrument, was deployed to assess motivational rankings after engaging in a lesson on

computer hardware components for both the control and experimental sample populations.

Mann-Whitney U analysis revealed significant differences between medians for all subfactors of
PR

Keller’s ARCS model; (a) attention, p < .001, (b) relevance, p = .002, (c) confidence, p = .002,

and (d) satisfaction, p < .001. Relevance was the lowest performing subfactor attributed to the

content or the pedagogical method. Satisfaction was the highest performing subfactor. The

significance of the elevated performance of satisfaction predicates on the understanding that

greater levels of student satisfaction fosters student persistence in online environments.

Confirmatory research is key for both educators and administration of post-secondary education

for evidence that illuminates the positive outcomes that adoption of AR for instruction can offer.

i
 Acknowledgements

First and foremost, this dissertation is a gift to my parents, Nuvia and Curtis Hammons.

Your hard work and perseverance in life, regardless of the circumstance, set the standard for my

own. Your unwavering devotion, love, and support promoted confidence and faith in my

potential. Thank you for always believing in me.

To my husband Steve who supports and encourages me in all my endeavors. Thank you

for cooking, carting kids and listening to my worries throughout this process. You always love

and believe in me even when I doubt myself. I couldn’t have accomplished this without you.

For my children Lauryn, Ashlynn, and Mason, this endeavor is intended as a meaningful

W
reminder that you can accomplish your goals, regardless of the obstacles. Thank you for being
IE
understanding, supportive, and respectful of your mother’s aspirations.

I would like to thank my chair Dr. Marvel for her expertise and calming approach. Your
EV
composed manner assisted in diffusing anxiety through this process. I would like to acknowledge

Dr. Collins, my subject matter expert, for the uplifting comments which boosted morale at

opportune moments. In a single phrase of encouragement, you changed momentum and self-
PR

efficacy.

Finally, thank you to Northcentral University for awarding a scholarship to assist with

financial responsibilities. This was an unexpected and greatly appreciated opportunity and gift.

ii
 Table of Contents

Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1

Statement of the Problem .......................................................................................................... 4

Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................. 5
Introduction to Theoretical Framework .................................................................................... 6
Introduction to Research Methodology and Design ................................................................. 8
Research Questions ................................................................................................................. 10
Hypotheses .............................................................................................................................. 11
Significance of the Study ........................................................................................................ 13
Definitions of Key Terms ....................................................................................................... 14
Summary ................................................................................................................................. 15

Chapter 2: Literature Review ........................................................................................................ 17

Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................................... 19

W
Student Motivation.................................................................................................................. 26
Attention ................................................................................................................................. 28
Relevance ................................................................................................................................ 29
Confidence .............................................................................................................................. 30
IE
Satisfaction.............................................................................................................................. 31
Augmented Reality ................................................................................................................. 32
Video Instruction .................................................................................................................... 44
EV
Distance Education ................................................................................................................. 45
Augmented Reality and Student Learning .............................................................................. 46
Teaching Computer Hardware Concepts ................................................................................ 48
Summary ................................................................................................................................. 49
PR

Chapter 3: Research Method......................................................................................................... 52

Research Methodology and Design ........................................................................................ 52

Population and Sample ........................................................................................................... 58
Instrumentation ....................................................................................................................... 65
Operational Definitions of Variables ...................................................................................... 73
Study Procedures .................................................................................................................... 74
Data Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 77
Assumptions............................................................................................................................ 83
Limitations .............................................................................................................................. 84
Delimitations ........................................................................................................................... 84
Ethical Assurances .................................................................................................................. 85
Summary ................................................................................................................................. 87

Chapter 4: Findings ....................................................................................................................... 89

Validity and Reliability of the Data ........................................................................................ 91

Results ................................................................................................................................... 100
Evaluation of the Findings .................................................................................................... 124

iii
 Summary ............................................................................................................................... 127

Chapter 5: Implications, Recommendations, and Conclusions .................................................. 129

Implications........................................................................................................................... 133
Recommendations for Practice ............................................................................................. 140
Recommendations for Future Research ................................................................................ 144
Conclusions ........................................................................................................................... 147

References ................................................................................................................................... 152

Appendix A Reduced Instructional Materials Motivation Scale RIMMS ................................. 185

Appendix B Permissions Request Instructional Materials Motivation Survey (RIMMS) ........ 187

Appendix C Consent Letter Video (Control) ............................................................................. 191

Appendix D Consent Letter Augmented Reality (Experimental) .............................................. 193

W
Appendix E Student Recruitment Email Video (Control) ......................................................... 195
IE
Appendix F Student Recruitment Email Augmented Reality (Experimental) .......................... 196

Appendix G Augmented Reality Instructions and Lesson Codes .............................................. 197

EV
Appendix H Random Assignment of Convenience Sample by Course..................................... 204

Appendix I SPSS Naming convention for Keller’s ARCS Factors ........................................... 205

Appendix J Median Values and Median Differences ................................................................ 206

PR

Appendix K CoSpaces Intellectual Property Declaration.......................................................... 207

iv
 List of Tables

Table 1 Aggregate Demographic Summary, Institution of Convenience ................................... 62

Table 2 Keller’s ARCS Factors and Associated RIMMS Questions .......................................... 67
Table 3 Cronbach’s Alpha Measure of Reliability - Attention ................................................... 98
Table 4 Cronbach’s Alpha Measure of Reliability - Relevance.................................................. 98
Table 5 Cronbach’s Alpha Measure of Reliability - Confidence ................................................ 99
Table 6 Cronbach’s Alpha Measure of Reliability - Satisfaction ............................................... 99
Table 7 Tests of Normality for One-Way MANOVA .............................................................. 103
Table 8 Nonparametric Levene’s Test for Attention ................................................................ 106
Table 9 Nonparametric Levene’s Test for Relevance ............................................................... 108
Table 10 Nonparametric Levene’s Test for Confidence ........................................................... 109
Table 11 Nonparametric Levene’s Test for Satisfaction ........................................................... 110
Table 12 Median Values for Video and AR Groups for Attention Motivation ........................ 111
Table 13 Mann-Whitney U SPSS analysis for Attention Motivation ....................................... 112
Table 14 Median Values for Video and AR Groups for Relevance Motivation ....................... 115

W
Table 15 Mann-Whitney U SPSS analysis for Relevance Motivation...................................... 115
Table 16 Median Values for Video and AR Groups for Confidence Motivation ..................... 118
Table 17 Mann-Whitney U SPSS analysis for Confidence Motivation .................................... 119
IE
Table 18 Median Values for Video and AR Groups for Satisfaction Motivation..................... 122
Table 19 Mann-Whitney U SPSS analysis for Satisfaction Motivation ................................... 122
EV
PR

v
 List of Figures

Figure 1 QR Code Generated for RAM Lesson .......................................................................... 70

Figure 2 CoSpaces Mobile AR App Illustration ......................................................................... 71
Figure 3 Dashboard for Augmented Reality Lesson Development – CoSpaces ........................ 72
Figure 4 High-Level Graphical Illustration of the Executed Procedural Stages......................... 76
Figure 5 One-Way MANOVA Assumption Testing Outlier Illustration ................................. 102
Figure 6 Visual Evidence of Equality of Variance for Attention with Normal Curve ............. 106
Figure 7 Visual Evidence of Equality of Variance for Relevance with Normal Curve ............ 107
Figure 8 Visual Evidence of Equality of Variance for Confidence with Normal Curve .......... 108
Figure 9 Visual Evidence of Equality of Variance for Satisfaction with Normal Curve.......... 109
Figure 10 Cohen’s Effect Size Calculation for Attention ......................................................... 113
Figure 11 Cohen’s Effect Size Calculation for Relevance ....................................................... 116
Figure 12 Cohen’s Effect Size Calculation for Confidence ...................................................... 120
Figure 13 Cohen’s Effect Size Calculation for Satisfaction ..................................................... 123
Figure 14 CoSpaces MergeCube Augmented Reality Book Report Template......................... 143

W
Figure 15 Visual Comparison of AR to PowerPoint Presentation ............................................ 146

IE
EV
PR

vi
 1

Chapter 1: Introduction

Augmented Reality (AR) consists of applying virtual objects, text, or audio (stationary or

animated) to an existent real-life background (Elmqaddem, 2019; Huang, et al., 2019; Low et al.,

2022). The premise surrounding Augmented Reality as an educational tool is based on evidence

that students can convert conceptual understanding to authentic comprehension through

immersion in an active learning experience (Arslan et al., 2020; Cabero-Almenara et al., 2019;

Cai et al., 2021, Corwin, 2020; Low et al., 2022). Augmented Reality is considered the next

computing theater and has grown exponentially in the last decade, experiencing its highest

expansion within the industry of education (Elmqaddem, 2019; Low et al., 2022). There are two

W
major categories of AR: (a) image-based and (b) location-based AR (Tzima et al., 2019). Image-
IE
based AR requires a pointer or a material artifact to activate such, as physical object or a QR

code (Badni K. S., 2018; Tzima et al., 2019). Location AR is activated by the geographical
EV
location such as a zone in a museum (Tzima et al., 2019).

Augmented Reality is among the top five significant technologies that will experience

rapid development in the next three years (Nurbekova & Baigusheva, 2020; BCG, 2021; Statista,
PR

2021b; Low et al., 2022). Industry data indicates that AR configured for teaching and learning is

predicted to be the next central platform to converge on the contemporary tech-savvy student

(Corwin, 2020; Elmqaddem, 2019). Augmented Reality as a technologically based educational

solution should include scalability characteristics and adaptivity to a myriad of personal system

platforms (Arslan et al., 2020, Corwin, 2020). Until recently, limitations in technology hindered

the application of AR in education outside of a highly technical laboratory (Corwin, 2020;

Elmqaddem, 2019). Recently, modern high-tech developments have fostered the plausibility of
 2

AR deployment for educational purposes that are immediate and designed for mobile devices

(Elmqaddem, 2019).

Students using AR for new concept acquisition achieve higher levels of self-efficacy and

achieve higher levels of motivation (Badni K. S., 2018; Cabero-Almenara et al., 2019; Khan et

al., 2019; Low et al., 2022). Higher levels of motivation coupled with heightened self-confidence

in the subject matter has been proven to enhance student achievement and persistence in online

courses (Cai et al., 2021; Martin & Bolliger, 2018). Augmented Reality infused curriculum for

instruction is currently rare, but gaining interest (Arslan et al., 2020, Corwin, 2020; Saat et al.,

2021; Low et al., 2022). Students engaging in AR applications for education express enthusiasm

W
and satisfaction (Cabero-Almenara et al., 2019; Cai et al., 2021; Salem et al., 2020). These
IE
students voiced a desire for future integration of Augmented Reality in their academic subjects

(Cabero-Almenara et al., 2019; Cai et al., 2021).

EV
Augmented Reality has been successful with haptic themes where physical objects are

topics of inquiry and learning, such as computer hardware components (Arslan et al., 2020; Bal

& Bicen, 2016; Cabero-Almenara et al., 2019; Corwin, 2020; Elmqaddem, 2019; Hajirasouli &
PR

Banihashemi, 2022). While tactile demonstrations are perceived most effective, these teaching

artifacts can depreciate physically or become stale relative to contemporary standards (Arslan et

al., 2020; Corwin, 2020; Elmqaddem, 2019). For example, sustained availability of the latest

computer systems for physical dissection is unrealistic. In a traditional classroom, where in-

person tactile experiences are part of the content pedagogy, instructors seek the means to

translate this experiential learning strategy to online learners (Arslan et al., 2020; Bursuc &

Wilsker, 2020; Corwin, 2020). With online and distance modalities on target to become the

standard classroom delivery modality by 2025, AR may perhaps serve as a bridge for many
 3

traditional hands-on instructional pedagogies, replacing expensive or stale demonstrative

equipment (Arslan et al., 2020; Chatman, et al., 2019; Palvia, et al., 2018; Low et al., 2022).

Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) based subjects are typically

fluid, continually impacted by new developments (Arslan et al., 2020; Van Nuland et al., 2020).

Augmented Reality solutions show promise for maintaining a sustainable, flexible, and scalable

educational solution or pedagogical tool for subjects with dynamic curriculum needs and rapidly

changing industry developments (Arslan et al., 2020; Cabero-Almenara et al., 2019; Corwin,

2020; Low et al., 2022). Students show increased motivation and engagement when the material

is relevant (Khan et al., 2019). For example, showing an interior of a Personal Computer (PC)

W
will be of less interest to a student who owns a Macintosh. Learning exercises that are
IE
meaningful and relevant are important for successful authentic understanding of concepts

(Grebe, 2021). The focus on real-life applicability leads to increased motivation, satisfaction, and
EV
retention (Martin & Bolliger, 2018; Rees Lewis et al., 2019; Roman et al., 2020).

The Survey of Computer Information Systems (CIS105) course at the target institution

for this research investigation required the identification of computer hardware components of
PR

computer systems and description of their uses in the course-mandated instructional

competencies (Maricopa Community Colleges, 2021). This content meets the characteristics of

classical didactic principles, direct transmission instruction (Nurbekova & Baigusheva, 2020).

The required course competencies for computer hardware component recognition resides in the

lower echelons of the Bloom’s Taxonomy learning hierarchy, remembering and identification

(Allen & Friedman, 2010).

Finally, adoption and integration of any instructional instrument is driven by a teacher’s

willingness to embrace and deploy (Tzima et al., 2019). Therefore, development of an AR lesson
 4

must be practical and achievable (Arslan et al., 2020). In one study, analysis of qualitative

feedback provided by surveyed teachers indicated a failure to acknowledge or visualize AR as a

teaching tool (Tzima et al., 2019). Instructor training and administrative support for Augmented

Reality as a cutting-edge option for content pedagogy is necessary to realize the potential of AR

as an impactful instructional agent (Osuna-Barroso etal., 2019; Pombo & Marques, 2021; Tzima

et al., 2019). The results from this research can serve as a catalyst to the growing body of studies

suggesting increased instructor training and support around Augmented Reality for teaching and

learning (Pombo & Marques, 2021; Tzima et al., 2019).

Statement of the Problem

W
The problem addressed in this quantitative study surrounded the limited deployment of
IE
Augmented Reality for distance learning environments to promote both student motivation and

bridge the gap between online and traditional instructional pedagogy for haptic subjects such as
EV
computer hardware components (Altınpulluk et al., 2020; Arslan et al., 2020; Badni K. S., 2018;

Bursuc & Wilsker, 2020; Chen, et al., 2021; Korde et al., 2021). Translating subjects to online

learners that traditionally require physical experiential artifacts is challenging (Arslan et al.,
PR

2020). This instructional challenge includes teaching computer hardware components, a difficult

subject for nascent undergraduates (Chen, et al., 2021).

As more students elect distance learning, educators strive to create equity between

learning modalities (Bowers, 2019). Augmented Reality serving as an educational technology to

support content pedagogy can provide the means to bridge the gap between online and traditional

instruction for haptic subjects (Arslan et al., 2020; Bursuc & Wilsker, 2020; Corwin, 2020;

Elmqaddem, 2019; Korde et al., 2021). Currently, research on the practice of using of

Augmented Reality for educational endeavors are limited yet increasing (Arifin et al., 2018;
 5

Cabero-Almenara et al., 2019; Law & Heintz, 2021; Laurens-Arredondo, 2021; Saat et al., 2021;

Lowet al., 2022). Augmented Reality is growing rapidly in all industries and investigations are

needed to justify development efforts for education (Gudoniene & Rutkauskiene, 2019; Khan et

al., 2019; Pombo & Marques, 2021). More research should be conducted for mobile AR in open

and distance environments (Altinpulluk et al., 2020; Maulana et al., 2020; Squires, 2018). Bandi

(2018) advocates for more research regarding AR for its influence on student motivation. This

research design tied together several elements which included (a) mobile AR ,(b) distance

education, (c) tactile subject matter, and (d) the overall influence of AR on student motivation.

Purpose of the Study

W
The purpose of this quantitative quasi-experimental study with two nonequivalent groups
IE
was to examine if Augmented Reality influenced the measure of student motivation in a

traditionally tactile subject, computer hardware components, in distance learning students. The
EV
investigation was guided by the constructs of Keller’s ARCS model relative to (a) attention, (b)

relevance, (c) confidence, and (d) satisfaction (Khan et al., 2019). In fields where interactive

hands-on activities such as science lab experiments are part of the curriculum, virtual learning
PR

fails to meet the course competencies (Arslan et al., 2020; Korde et al., 2021). Additionally,

distance students’ engagement often diminishes due to declining motivation (Korde et al., 2021).

Students enrolled in an online or hybrid section of Survey of Computer Information Systems

(CIS105) at a community college in the southwest United States were the target sample

population for this research. The values from the Reduced Instructional Materials Motivation

Survey (RIMMS), designed to measure student-perceived motivation, served as the single major

data input (Becerra & Almendra, 2020). See Appendix A. The instructional approach, video

(control) or AR (experimental), served as the independent variables. Dependent variables

 6

included motivation subscale values from the RIMMS instrument to evaluate (a) attention, (b)

relevance, (c) confidence, and (d) satisfaction (Wang et al., 2020). Currently, there are no

examples of AR for educational purposes at the target site. Analysis of student motivation was

executed through Mann-Whitney U analysis (Cramer & Howitt, 2004; Richardson, 2018).

Results from G* Power software suggested a minimum sample size of 125 participants or 62.5

for each independent group (Kang, 2021). The total sample population was n = 140: control (71),

experimental (69).

Introduction to Theoretical Framework

Keller’s ARCS Model of motivational design was the adopted theoretical framework of

W
this study (Khan et al., 2019). I selected the ARCS Model primarily because the model identifies
IE
four major factors that contribute to student motivation for (a) attention, (b) relevance, (c)

confidence, and (d) satisfaction (Khan et al., 2019; Milman, 2019). I selected this expansion for
EV
the potential contribution to a more precise and richer study surrounding the motivational

influence of the experimental independent variable: an AR infused lesson on computer hardware

components. The selection of student motivation as an investigatory agent supported both the
PR

problem and the purpose in this quasi-experiment for the challenges in motivating distance

learning students and the knowledge that computer hardware concepts is a low motivation and

engagement subject for online environments (Cebi & Guyer, 2020; Chandramouli & Chittamuru,

2016; Chen, et al., 2021). Further support for the selection of the ARCS model is reinforced by

the knowledge that increases in student motivation have been empirically proven to fostering

student academic success (Khan et al., 2019). Research question number one was crafted to

measure the influence of an AR experience on student attention. Attention is the formative factor

for aggregate student motivation under the ARCS model and produces a measure of persistence
 7

potential in a pedagogical experience (Khan et al., 2019; Milman, 2019). At present, a wealth of

digital stimuli is available on demand, which is known to reduce returns on student attention

(Feldon et al., 2019). This abundance of material and the proliferation of online instruction

requires distance learning faculty to construct new ways to attract student attention (Zhang et al.,

2019). Augmented Reality as a pedagogical tool served as the novel attention gaining agent in

this investigation (Badni K. S., 2018; Khan et al., 2017; Stoa & Chu, 2020). Research question

number two was composed to evaluate student perceived relevance of the AR lesson.

Capitalizing on a student’s perceived future usefulness incites beliefs of importance (Khan et al.,

2019; Milman, 2019). According to Grebe (2021), relevance is a mediating factor on basic

W
attention and student confidence. Research question number three was designed to examined
IE
student perceived confidence under the AR condition. Confidence relates to the level of self-

efficacy that the student possesses for potential success (Cai et al., 2021; Hobson & Puruhito,
EV
2018). Using pedagogical methods with which students are familiar fosters confidence that they

can succeed, such as mobile technology (Anwer, 2019; Khan et al., 2019). I applied mobile

technology for this endeavor. The final research question was drafted to consider the level of
PR

perceived student satisfaction associated with an AR lesson. In education, satisfaction is

classified as a measure of achievement or enjoyment the student gains from the instructional

event (Chang et al., 2019; Khan et al., 2019; Rees Lewis et al., 2019). Satisfaction has been

empirically linked to student persistence (Hobson & Puruhito, 2018; Um & Jang, 2021).

Instruction of computer hardware concepts was selected as the target theme since

students find the topic unmotivating and boring (Chandramouli & Chittamuru, 2016; Raven et

al., 2016). Tactile hands-on learning experiences are considered the best method to teach

computer hardware concepts (Raven et al., 2016). In a distance learning environment, providing
 8

computer hardware component tactile learning aids would prove costly to replicate for each

individual online learner (Arslan et al., 2020; Jurc et al., 2020). Augmented Reality has been

used to serve as a pseudo haptic learning aid for traditionally tactile themes (Altmeyer, et al.,

2020; Corwin, 2020; Elmqaddem, 2019; Tzima et al., 2019) Since AR was not being used

instructionally at the target institution, it was an opportune environment for this study.

Introduction to Research Methodology and Design

The primary purpose of this quantitative quasi-experimental study with two

nonequivalent groups design is to examine if an Augmented Reality (AR) infused lesson

influences the measure of motivation for distance students engaged in an instructional event of a

W
typically tactile theme: computer hardware components. Quantitative approaches to research are
IE
the dominant framework for social science investigations and are associated with studies that

adopt the scientific method requiring (a) an adopted theoretical framework and (b) formulation
EV
of an investigative hypothesis (Coghlan & Brydon-Miller, 2022; Kraska, 2012b). The data

gathered through quantitative research is evaluated using inferential statistical methods seeking

to uncover information, patterns, or correlations associated with a population (Coghlan &

PR

Brydon-Miller, 2022; Kraska, 2012b).

A form of quantitative analysis, quasi-experimental, nonequivalent groups design

(NEGD), was the adopted strategy for this research and it is applicable when comparing two

groups that are similar in nature prior to the experimental application (Frey, 2018; Kraska,

2012b; Salkind, 2011). Quasi-experimental research endeavors are similar or quasi to a

randomized control trial apart from the application of true randomization (Maciejewski, 2020;

Siedlecki, 2020). Quasi-experimental strategies are deployed in naturally occurring

environments, such as a classroom, and are designed to investigate the value of a treatment
 9

condition (Siedlecki, 2020). In this experiment, true randomization was not possible because the

public email distribution lists for recruiting are not expanded by student only the class level.

Additionally, the license to view the control group video was guaranteed at the target institution.

Since true randomization was not possible, convenience sampling with purposive properties, a

non-probability sampling method, was selected for this study (Salkind, 2012; Waltermaurer,

2012). Convenience sampling identifies participants or categories for analysis based on

availability, vicinity, or opportunity (Etikan et al., 2016; Salkind, 2012; Waterfield, 2018). For

the purposive element, the sample is filtered by a condition such as the emphasis on distance

learning students (Waltermaurer, 2012). Support for purposive convenience sampling in this

W
research endeavor centers on (a) naturally occurring independent groups of CIS105 at the
IE
institution of convenience and (b) all participants being enrolled in a distance modality class,

online or hybrid online. The target sample population, distance CIS105 students, was an
EV
applicable source for investigating the problem of this quasi-experiment since (a) recognition of

computer hardware components is a uniform competency at a district level and (b) the gap in

pedagogy for instructing typically hands-on subjects for distance learners (Arslan et al., 2020;
PR

Korde et al., 2021; Maricopa Community Colleges, 2021).

The Reduced Instructional Materials Motivation Survey (RIMMS), designed to assess

student motivation associated with an instructional method, was the exclusive input for this

quantitative analysis (Becerra & Almendra, 2020; Loorbach et al., 2015). I aspired to collect

demographic information in the initial dissertation proposal. The NCU IRB determined this

immaterial since the research questions did not have an indication for this type of data.

Permission was requested and granted by the author, Nicole Loorbach, for the use of the RIMMS

(Loorbach et al., 2015). See Appendix B. The participant submitted values through the RIMMS
 10

survey were examined for meeting parametric assumptions of a proposed one-way MANOVA

analysis, suggested by NCU Statistical support (J. White, personal communication, November 5,

2021). Parametric assumptions for one-way MANOVA failed for normality assumption tests

with several sub-factors exhibiting p < 0.05 measured by Shapiro-Wilk's test (Laerd Statistics,

2015; Salkind, 2007). After parametric assumption failure, adoption of the non-parametric

Mann-Whitney U statistical approach followed. The Mann-Whitney U test is a rank-based non-

parametric test that confirms differences between two groups on an ordinal dependent variable

and was fitting for this dataset since this study encompassed one independent variable with two

groups and ordinal dependent variable data (Laerd Statistics, 2015; Richardson, 2018). The

W
Mann-Whitney U test was an adopted approach in a peer-reviewed journal article that deployed
IE
the RIMMS (Villena Taranilla et al., 2019). The inclusion of multiple dependent variables is

useful when attempting to determine where the independent variable is of greatest influence
EV
(Reinhart, 2018). This analysis approach was ideal for this study given the stated research

questions seeking to identify the influence of four separate motivational factors, the dependent

variables, under the ARCS model of (a) attention, (b) relevance, (c) confidence and (d)
PR

satisfaction (Khan et al., 2019; Milman, 2019).

Research Questions

Current research on Augmented Reality as a tool to deliver online students experiential

instructional lessons is limited but on the rise (Arifin et al., 2018; Cabero-Almenara et al., 2019;

Law & Heintz, 2021; Masneri et al., 2022; Saat et al., 2021; Lowet al., 2022). As technology

supports the growth and application of AR in all trades, specific investigations targeting

education are crucial to petition for increased development efforts (Gudoniene & Rutkauskiene,

2019; Pombo & Marques, 2021; Khan et al., 2019; Sural, 2018). To gain a greater understanding
 11

of Augmented Reality as a viable educational technology for teaching and learning in haptic

subjects, the following research questions were crafted.

RQ1

What is the effect of an Augmented Reality (AR) infused lesson on computer hardware

components on student attention motivation measured by the Reduced Instructional Materials

Motivation Survey (RIMMS) (Becerra & Almendra, 2020; Wang, et al., 2020)?

RQ2

What is the effect of an Augmented Reality (AR) infused lesson on computer hardware

components on student relevance motivation measured by the Reduced Instructional Materials

W
Motivation Survey (RIMMS) (Becerra & Almendra, 2020; Wang, et al., 2020)?

RQ3
IE
What is the effect of an Augmented Reality (AR) infused lesson on computer hardware
EV
components on student confidence motivation measured by the Reduced Instructional Materials

Motivation Survey (RIMMS) (Becerra & Almendra, 2020; Wang, et al., 2020)?

RQ4
PR

What is the effect of an Augmented Reality (AR) infused lesson on computer hardware

components on student satisfaction motivation measured by the Reduced Instructional Materials

Motivation Survey (RIMMS) (Becerra & Almendra, 2020; Wang, et al., 2020)?

Hypotheses

H10

An Augmented Reality (AR) infused lesson on computer hardware components will not

correlate with student attention motivation measured by the Reduced Instructional Materials

Motivation Survey (RIMMS) values (Becerra & Almendra, 2020; Wang, et al., 2020).
 12

H1a

An Augmented Reality (AR) infused lesson on computer hardware components will

correlate with student attention motivation measured by the Reduced Instructional Materials

Motivation Survey (RIMMS) values (Becerra & Almendra, 2020; Wang, et al., 2020).

H20

An Augmented Reality (AR) infused lesson on computer hardware components will not

correlate with student relevance motivation measured by the Reduced Instructional Materials

Motivation Survey (RIMMS) values (Becerra & Almendra, 2020; Wang, et al., 2020).

H2a

W
An Augmented Reality (AR) infused lesson on computer hardware components will
IE
correlate with student relevance motivation measured by the Reduced Instructional Materials

Motivation Survey (RIMMS) values (Becerra & Almendra, 2020; Wang, et al., 2020).
EV
H30

An Augmented Reality (AR) infused lesson on computer hardware components will not

correlate with student confidence motivation measured by the Reduced Instructional Materials
PR

Motivation Survey (RIMMS) values (Becerra & Almendra, 2020; Wang, et al., 2020).

H3a

An Augmented Reality (AR) infused lesson on computer hardware components will

correlate with student confidence motivation measured by the Reduced Instructional Materials

Motivation Survey (RIMMS) values (Becerra & Almendra, 2020; Wang, et al., 2020).
 13

H40

An Augmented Reality (AR) infused lesson on computer hardware components will not

correlate with student satisfaction motivation measured by the Reduced Instructional Materials

Motivation Survey (RIMMS) values (Becerra & Almendra, 2020; Wang, et al., 2020).

H4a

An Augmented Reality (AR) infused lesson on computer hardware components will

correlate with student satisfaction motivation measured by the Reduced Instructional Materials

Motivation Survey (RIMMS) values (Becerra & Almendra, 2020; Wang, et al., 2020).

Significance of the Study

W
The primary significance of this study is to advance an increasing body of confirmatory
IE
evidence for the value of AR as a motivational instrument for instruction of tactile subjects in

distance modalities. Motivation is a contributor in student persistence, an ongoing enigma for

EV
tertiary institutions (Cebi & Guyer, 2020; Hobson & Puruhito, 2018; Martin & Bolliger, 2018).

A proven educational tool that affords capacity for learning with enhanced levels of student

motivation may lend to increased considerations for both employee development budgets and
PR

adoption of AR for instruction (Osuna-Barroso et al., 2019). As the growth of distance education

proliferates globally, institutions continue to seek methods to equal traditional face-to-face

learning experiences (Goralski & Falk, 2017; Palvia, et al., 2018). In response, educators must

meet the challenge by leveraging modern constructs of educational technology (Corwin, 2020;

Palvia, et al., 2018). Augmented Reality can meet the needs of tactile subjects such as biology,

physics, and computer hardware (Arslan et al., 2020; Bal & Bicen, 2016; Low et al., 2022).

Furthermore, while AR is regularly associated with STEM disciplines, AR has also shown gains

for supplementing general education subjects such as English and history (Badni K. S., 2018;
 14

Bonner & Reinders, 2018). As digital natives become the mainstay student population, educators

must meet the needs of their consumers (Corwin, 2020; Nikou, 2019). Students that are afforded

an opportunity to engage with AR technology designed for academic study expressed an appetite

for future integration of AR for scholastic endeavors (Cabero-Almenara et al., 2019; Cai et al.,

2021; Sahin & Yilmaz, 2020). Within the next three years, Augmented Reality is predicted to

rank among the top five developing industries (BCG, 2021; Nurbekova & Baigusheva, 2020;

Statista, 2021b). The timing of AR adoption in education is opportune (Elmqaddem, 2019;

Sweller et al., 2019; Low et al., 2022).

Definitions of Key Terms

W
ARCS Model of Motivational Design
IE
The ARCS Model of Motivational Design is an instructional design model applied to the

design of pedagogical methods to promote sustained student motivation. The ARCS model
EV
advocates for the incorporation of four constructs that support (a) attention, (b) relevance, (c)

confidence, and (d) satisfaction (Khan et al., 2019; Milman, 2019).

Augmented Reality (AR)

PR

Augmented Reality (AR) is an interactive experience that applies computer generated

virtual objects (stationary or animated), text, or even audio to an existent real-life background.

There are two major categories of AR: (a) image based and (b) location based Augmented

Reality (Elmqaddem, 2019).

Computer Information Systems 105 (CIS105)

Computer Information Systems 105 (CIS105) is a general education course that serves as

a university transfer agreement course deployed in fall 2021 at the site community college.
 15

Overview of computer technology, concepts, terminology, and the role of computers in business

and society (Maricopa Community Colleges, 2021).

Reduced Instructional Materials Motivation Survey (RIMMS)

The Reduced Instructional Materials Motivation Survey (RIMMS) aims to determine the

motivational characteristics of an instructional pedagogy or a course (Becerra & Almendra,

2020; Loorbach et al., 2015; Wang, et al., 2020). The survey instrument is fundamentally rooted

from the ARCS Model of Motivational Design (Khan et al., 2019).

Summary

Chapter 1 introduced the research objective and supporting purpose for the investigation

W
into Augmented Reality as viable and beneficial tool for content instruction. This quantitative
IE
quasi-experimental study was designed to investigate the viability of AR as a mainstream

instructional instrument for distance modalities. This research inquiry adopted the agents of
EV
Keller’s ARCS motivational model and the associated RIMMS survey instrument to reveal

evidence of student motivation (Khan et al., 2019; Milman, 2019). The data collected and

analyzed offers support for AR as a substantiated teaching technology that promotes student
PR

motivation in a distance modality. Currently, there are limited occurrences citing the integration

and deployment of AR as a pedagogical agent in distance modalities and further research is

necessary (Cabero-Almenara et al., 2019; Sural, 2018; Tzima et al., 2019; Sural, 2018). Teachers

are open to AR as a teaching instrument but lack administrative support for development and

training (Osuna-Barroso etal., 2019; Pombo & Marques, 2021). Favorable results from this study

may increase leverage for the appeal for additional training to support development efforts as

well as confirmatory data for AR as a valued pedagogical option.

 16

Chapter 2 offers relative information linked to the research questions of this study driven

at the principal level by the underlying theoretical theme of student motivation, specifically

Keller’s ARCS motivation model (Khan et al., 2019). Evidence of the impact of student

motivation and its function as the guiding impetus in this study is presented for motivational

constructs of (a) attention, (b) relevance, (c) confidence, and (d) satisfaction under Keller’s

ARCS model (Khan et al., 2019; Milman, 2019). With the literature review’s intent to present

information that frames the study, information related to Augmented Reality and its application

in an educational domain as well as competing technologies are be explored. Next, related

constructs that address distance learning and contextual evidence for teaching computer

W
hardware concepts are considered.
IE
EV
PR

Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.