Revisiting augmented reality
Warren Fearn, Associate Professor in Design at York St John University, discussed the project with Una Lodge from UON as part of Digital Horizons, a collection of case studies exploring how educators use digital technology in their practice. His experience suggests that augmented reality can stimulate curiosity, but its educational value depends on thoughtful design and a clear learning purpose.
Warren’s interest in augmented reality, or AR, began long before smartphones and tablets made it widely accessible. Before moving into academia, he worked at the BBC in virtual reality and 3D animation. A colleague introduced him to AR in the late 1990s, when the technology was still highly experimental.
He returned to it more than two decades later, by which time AR experiences could be delivered through everyday mobile devices. This opened up an interesting question: could augmented reality support teaching and learning in primary schools?
With funding from an Unreal MegaGrant, Warren began exploring how schools might use AR and what might prevent them from adopting it. The work became the focus of his PhD research.
Rather than concentrating only on what the technology could do, Warren used service design thinking to examine everything surrounding it. A successful experience would depend on more than a well-made app. It would also be shaped by the school’s digital infrastructure and the confidence of the teachers who would use it.
“You have to look not only at the device and the technology, but at what surrounds it as well,” Warren explains.
Building an augmented exhibition
To explore these questions in practice, Warren created a large cardboard exhibition and took it into seven primary schools. The exhibition consisted of geometric cardboard structures carrying AR markers.
When pupils pointed a tablet at a marker, it triggered digital material that appeared on the screen as part of the physical environment.
The exhibition focused on climate-related science. Pupils encountered material about habitats and renewable technology, with each station offering a different experience.
The contrast between the simple cardboard structures and the digital content was part of the appeal. The physical exhibition gave pupils something tangible to move around, while AR added another layer of information.
“The pupils thought it was brilliant,” Warren recalls. “They really loved it.”
Pupils explored the exhibition in small groups and shared the tablets as they moved between stations.
Warren found that this encouraged conversation and turn-taking. The children often managed the devices between themselves without needing an adult to allocate roles.
Their ideas also extended beyond their own experience. During the follow-up discussions, pupils suggested introducing a buddy system in which they could guide younger children around the exhibition and help them learn about science. For Warren, this was an encouraging sign that they saw themselves not only as users of the technology, but as people capable of supporting somebody else’s learning.
Helping teachers become curious
The exhibition also gave Warren an opportunity to observe how teachers responded to AR. Some had not encountered the technology before and were initially uncertain about it.
Seeing pupils use the exhibition made the idea more concrete. Teachers could watch how the activity worked and consider where it might fit within their own practice. As the sessions progressed, Warren noticed a change in their response.
“They became much more relaxed and curious about what the technology could do,” he says.
This highlights an important aspect of digital adoption. Teachers may find it difficult to judge the value of an unfamiliar technology from a description or demonstration alone. A supported experience, situated within a recognisable learning activity, can make its possibilities easier to understand.
Warren is now considering how this model could help schools move gradually towards greater ownership. An exhibition might initially arrive as a visiting roadshow, allowing pupils and teachers to experience it without having to build anything themselves.
Once teachers feel more comfortable, they could help shape the subject matter. One school might want an exhibition about space, while another could choose a topic that connects with its current science curriculum. In time, teachers might become confident enough to manage an exhibition themselves.
The aim is not to impose a finished technological product on a school. It is to create a route through which staff can become familiar with AR and begin adapting it to their own context.
The novelty is only the beginning
The excitement generated by AR was valuable, but Warren’s findings also revealed its limits. Pupils and teachers recognised that the novelty could fade if the technology were used too often.
Rather than making AR an everyday feature, teachers suggested using it at carefully chosen moments. It might launch a new topic or provide a memorable experience during a science week. It could also support an event where parents join their children in exploring science.
The distinction matters because engagement is not the same as learning. An animated model appearing in a school hall may immediately attract attention, but that does not guarantee that pupils will understand or remember the information it presents.
Warren used follow-up questions to investigate what pupils had retained. Their responses varied between exhibition stations. Some experiences communicated their ideas effectively, while others placed too many demands on the learner’s attention.
“Less is more,” Warren says. “You don’t want to overload pupils with information.”
This became one of the project’s clearest lessons. AR makes it tempting to fill the screen with content simply because the technology allows it. From a learning perspective, however, a single clear focus is often more effective.
“It is more about the focus and what pupils are looking at and doing.”
Learning needs to surround the technology
Warren also found that AR could not carry the learning experience by itself. Pupils needed opportunities to pause and talk about what they had encountered. Teachers needed ways to identify misunderstandings and connect the digital experience with the wider lesson.
This means placing scaffolding around the technology. A short AR encounter might be followed by a class discussion. Pupils might record an observation before moving to the next part of the exhibition.
What matters is that they have time to process the experience rather than simply moving from one digital effect to another.
The physical demands of using tablets also need attention. Devices can become heavy, particularly when pupils hold them up for an extended period. In a group, not everyone can always see the screen clearly. Differences in pupils’ height can make sharing more awkward.
Regular pauses can help. They give pupils a chance to put down the device and return their attention to one another. Warren’s observations also suggest that smaller groups make it easier for pupils to participate and take turns.
Designing for access
Accessibility must be considered across the whole experience. In the cardboard exhibition, the position of each AR marker affected whether a pupil could reach it. The structures therefore needed to work for pupils at different heights, including those using wheelchairs.
Typography created another challenge. Text that looks clear on a conventional page may become difficult to read when it is superimposed over a busy classroom or school hall. As the user moves the tablet, the background behind the words changes.
Warren would now make different decisions about the typeface used in the exhibition and place greater emphasis on legibility. He would also consider adding a consistent background behind digital text so that it remains readable wherever the pupil points the device.
These may appear to be small design choices, but they shape who can take part in the activity and how easily pupils can understand what they see.
Access to devices presents a wider challenge. Warren found substantial differences between the technology available in different schools. An approach that works smoothly in one setting may be difficult to reproduce elsewhere.
To reduce reliance on school Wi-Fi, the project used an app that could be downloaded to a tablet in advance and then operated offline. This made the experience more reliable while responding to teachers’ concerns about connectivity.
Making creation more accessible
Producing the exhibition’s digital material required specialist skills. Warren used Unreal Engine and drew on his experience in 3D production. This level of development would not currently be realistic for many teachers.
He believes artificial intelligence may begin to change that. Emerging tools can convert drawings or written prompts into 3D assets, reducing some of the technical work involved in creating AR content. If these processes become simpler, teachers may find it easier to develop experiences connected to their own curriculum.
This possibility brings new questions about safeguarding and the suitability of generated content, particularly if pupils become creators themselves. Easier production will not remove the need for careful oversight.
For now, Warren’s project offers a grounded message about the role of augmented reality in education. The technology can create excitement and help pupils encounter ideas in new ways. Its value, however, comes from how it is introduced and what happens around it.
A cardboard structure that suddenly comes alive may open the door to learning. Good educational design can then help pupils walk through it.
