Can Augmented Reality Revolutionize Lessons? Find Out What Students Think

Augmented reality (AR) is reshaping how we learn, turning classrooms into interactive spaces. Researchers tested ComputAR, a mobile app designed for a unit on computer systems, with 321 high‑school students aged 14‑17. After using the app, participants completed a questionnaire based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), which assesses five factors: perceived usefulness, ease of use, enjoyment, attitude toward use, and behavioral intention. The findings reveal a high acceptance level: most students find AR useful and fun, and they intend to keep using it.

Gender differences appear only in perceived ease of use, with male students rating it as easier, while usefulness and intention to use are similar across sexes. Moreover, students with prior ICT experience rated the app as more enjoyable, easier to use, and more useful.

These results suggest AR can boost motivation and engagement, especially when learners already have digital skills. Teachers could leverage such technologies to make lessons more immersive, but they should consider varying perceptions of ease of use to ensure all students benefit equally.

The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), introduced by Davis in 1989, remains one of the most widely used frameworks to explain technology adoption. The model rests on two primary constructs: perceived usefulness (PU), the belief that using the technology will enhance performance, and perceived ease of use (PEOU), the perception that the technology is free of effort. In this study, TAM was extended to include perceived enjoyment (PE) and attitude toward using (ATU), acknowledging that fun and emotional attitude also shape behavioral intention (BI).

The quasi‑experimental design employed a post‑test on a sample of 321 students, with a roughly balanced gender distribution (≈ 52 % female, 48 % male). The ComputAR app was built with Unity and Vuforia, embedding 3D models of hardware components (CPU, RAM, motherboard) and animations triggered by printed markers. Students interacted with the content for about 45 minutes before completing a validated TAM questionnaire consisting of 25 items on a 7‑point Likert scale.

Statistical analysis using SPSS 27 showed Cronbach's alpha > 0.85 for all constructs, ensuring reliability. A two‑way ANOVA revealed a significant gender effect on PEOU (F(1,317)=6.42, p<0.01), but not on PU or BI. Prior ICT experience, measured via a self‑assessment index, positively impacted PE (β=0.31, p<0.001), PEOU (β=0.27, p<0.001), and PU (β=0.22, p<0.01).

Pedagogically, the findings confirm that AR can act as an "engagement catalyst," especially when students perceive the interface as intuitive and enjoyable. However, the gender disparity in PEOU suggests the need for inclusive design, such as more detailed tutorials or customizable UI options. Moreover, the influence of ICT experience indicates that AR integration should be paired with preliminary digital literacy activities to flatten the learning curve and maximize cognitive benefits.

Future research could explore longitudinal AR effects on learning outcomes (knowledge tests, skill transfer) and assess the impact of varying immersion levels (smartphone AR vs. AR head‑mounted displays). Additionally, investigating how socio‑cultural factors (e.g., socioeconomic background) interact with TAM constructs would help design more equitable and scalable interventions.