Interactive Learning System for Learning Calculus

Md Asifur Rahman; Lew Sook Ling; Ooi Shih Yin

doi:10.12688/f1000research.73595.1

Home Browse Interactive Learning System for Learning Calculus

ALL Metrics

Views

Downloads

Get PDF

Get XML

Export

▬

✚

Research Article

Interactive Learning System for Learning Calculus

[version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations]

Md Asifur Rahman¹, Lew Sook Ling ¹, Ooi Shih Yin¹

PUBLISHED 14 Mar 2022

Author details Author details

¹ Faculty of Information Science and Technology, Multimedia University, Ayer Keroh, Melaka, 75450, Malaysia

Md Asifur Rahman
Roles: Data Curation, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Lew Sook Ling
Roles: Conceptualization, Funding Acquisition, Project Administration, Resources, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing

Ooi Shih Yin
Roles: Conceptualization, Project Administration, Writing – Review & Editing

OPEN PEER REVIEW

REVIEWER STATUS

This article is included in the Research Synergy Foundation gateway.

Abstract

Background: IT tools assist in creating a more participative and independent learning environment. They have brought a new perspective to collaborative learning where students do not just sit in a chair and swallow lecture content but instead participate in creating and sharing knowledge. However, interactivity promoted through the implementation of technology is limited in many cases.
Purpose: This research develops an interactive application for learning calculus that promotes human-system interaction via augmented reality (AR) and human-human interaction through chat functions. The study examines the effect of both interactivities on learning experience and how that learning experience affects the performance of learning.
Methods: The research adopted a quasi-experimental study design and pre-post test data analysis to evaluate the effect of interactivities on learning experience and consequently the effect of learning experience on learning performance. The subjects were exposed to the developed application for learning the calculus chapter ‘Revolution of Solids” in a controlled environment. The study validated its research framework through partial least squares path modelling and tested three hypotheses via pre-and post-test evaluation.
Conclusions: The results found that both interactivities affect learning experience positively; human-human interactivity has a higher impact than human-system interactivity. It was also found that learning performance as part of the learning experience increased from pre-test to post-test.

Keywords

Interactive learning system, augmented reality, learning experience, learning performance

Corresponding author: Lew Sook Ling

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information: This research is funded and supported by Multimedia University under the MMU Graduate Research Assistant (GRA) Scheme with Grant Reference Number: MMUI/170099. Md Asifur Rahman is the appointed GRA for this grant.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Copyright: © 2022 Rahman MA et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to cite: Rahman MA, Sook Ling L and Yin OS. Interactive Learning System for Learning Calculus [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2022, 11:307 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.73595.1) First published: 14 Mar 2022, 11:307 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.73595.1) Latest published: 11 Mar 2024, 11:307 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.73595.2)

Introduction

In traditional classroom environments, there exists a problem with student participation.¹ It is also stated that the traditional method is inefficient as it is mostly spoon-feeding, and students’ analytical processes are absent due to a lack of peer interaction.² Although some studies have addressed the issues of student interaction with the system there is still a lack of teacher-student or student-student interaction in interactive learning systems.¹^–³ Many systems have promoted a single type of interactivity.⁴^–¹⁰

Calculus is one of the core subjects in computer science studies. Malaysian students pursuing diplomas and degrees in Information Technology take calculus subjects that include differentiation, and integration. Application of integration is one of the chapters in Calculus that requires spatial visualization and the 2D medium of the traditional classroom does not provide a proper solution.¹¹^–¹³

In understanding the revolution of solids around an axis, visualization of the solid in-question is very important. Spatially related 3D images cannot be drawn on a 2D board or projected over a computer. These hinder students in visualizing the solid and result in difficulties in conceptualizing the concept. Although researchers have implemented AR to assist in visualization, they are mainly focused on human-system interaction, either through haptic or non-haptic interaction.¹⁴^–¹⁷ Besides, agility is another issue that some systems could not address as they are desktop-based systems.¹⁷^–¹⁹ As such, developing an interactive AR application that facilitates both human-human and human-system interactivities and assists in conceptualizing and understanding math better is needed.

The use of interactive technology in pedagogy has become very common in the last decade. Interactive technology has made learning more personalized and kept students engaged through various applications.²⁰ Abykanova et al. also suggested that interactive technology can make learning more active, and intensive for students where students can communicate easily with each-others and also with the teacher.²⁰ Game-based learning, multimedia lectures and labs, and electronic study guides are some examples of the most common interactive technologies in the pedagogy sector. Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students¹⁴^,¹⁹^,²¹ while some others implemented it for calculus.¹²^,¹³ In both cases, the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR that allows students to comprehend and conceptualize learning content.

Literature review

Implementation of interactive learning systems in class to engage students in learning has become a common focus in the pedagogical arena. A system that promotes interpersonal interaction and provides a sense of others’ presence can be considered as an interactive system.⁴

Interactivity

In an attempt to increase class interactivity different types of technologies have been implemented in class. These can be categorized as synchronous and asynchronous mediums of interaction.²² Synchronous is used as a medium of interaction during class, especially when participating in in-class discussions, whereas asynchronous is for facilitating learning remotely, which may happen after the class. Examples of synchronous learning tools include interactive whiteboards² and virtual-reality-based systems for learning language.⁴ An example of an interactive learning system for asynchronous learning is an AR-based interactive book.⁵ On the other hand, interactivity can also be categorized as human-system and human-human, as technologies are allowing both in a learning environment.³ Human-human interactivity is further divided into teacher-student and student-student interactivity. Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivities.

Table 1. Interactivities of different studies.

No	Study	Teacher-Student	Student-Student	Interactive system
1	¹	✓	✓	×
2	²	✓	✓	✓
3	⁴	×	×	✓
4	¹⁰	×	×	✓
5	⁵	×	×	✓
6	⁶	×	×	✓
7	⁴³	×	✓	✓
8	⁹	×	×	✓
9	³	✓	✓	✓
10	⁷	×	×	✓
11	⁴⁰	✓	×	✓
12	⁸	×	×	✓

AR has become a trending technology in the pedagogical sector to provide students with an immersive experience. AR provides a real and virtual experience together to allow users real-time interaction.¹⁶ 3D representation of a virtual object in a real environment can make learning more engaging as it provides a visual learning experience. This can be helpful to the majority of students as studies have found that there are more visual learners compared to auditory or kinesthetic learners.²³ Besides, haptic interaction happens when users are allowed to interact with the 3D object through AR technology²⁴ which also address kinesthetic learners as they learn through physical involvement. Table 2 depicts the interactivities promoted by different AR studies.

Table 2. AR interactivities of different studies.

No	Study	Teacher-Student	Student-Student	Interactive book/system	Mobility
1	¹⁶	×	×	✓	✓
2	²⁴	×	×	✓	✓
3	¹⁴	×	×	✓	✓
4	¹⁸	×	×	✓	×
5	¹⁹	×	×	✓	×
6	¹⁷	×	×	✓	×
7	¹⁵	×	×	✓	✓
8	⁴¹	×	×	✓	✓

From the studies depicted in Table 2, five papers adopted mobility in their AR system except the three that were desktop-based. This table also shows that the systems solely focused on interaction through AR and not on implementing any human-human interactivity.

Learning Experience

The learning experience can be defined as the experience a learner goes through while learning content set by an institution.²⁵ Including active engagement and collaboration as a part of it affects learning performances²⁶^,²⁷ Furthermore, implementation of technology in class affects the learning experience positively.²⁸

Methods

A pre-test and post-test quasi-experimental research design was adopted. The data was collected through a personally administered questionnaire survey. As the study was designed to be conducted using a pre-and post-test methodology, a longitudinal time horizon was adopted since the study was comparing students’ learning experience and performance before and after using the application.

Sampling method

Sample size calculation was done by following the 10 times rule, where the sample size is required to be 10 times larger than the maximum number of structural paths directed towards a latent variable.³⁰ As such the minimum sample for this study is supposed to be larger than 20 as two paths are directed towards the latent variable. The sample size for this research was 59, but after eliminating missing data and straight-line answers the data was analyzed from 55 respondents. The respondents were students from a Malaysian university taking Calculus. At the end, the data was analyzed and hypotheses were accepted or rejected based on the p-values. Figure 1 illustrates the research design of this study.

Figure 1. Research design.

Research framework

This research has identified two types of interactivities, human-human and human-system. Figure 2 depicts the research framework of this study.

Figure 2. Research framework.

An interactive learning system based on AR was developed. Human-system and human-human interactivities were included as part of application functions. Human-system interaction was promoted by haptic interaction based on marker-based AR technology whereas human-human interactivity was implemented through a function of discussion platform. The framework was developed to find how these two interactivities affect the learning experience, the first dependent variable, and lastly how the learning experience incurred by the promoted interactivities affects students’ academic performance.

This study hypothesizes:

H1:

Human-system interaction is positively associated with students’ learning experience.

H2:

Human-human interaction is positively associated with students’ learning experience.

H3:

Improvement of learning experience improves the performance of learning

Research procedure

This research was conducted into three phases, in the first phase the students were asked to answer a pre-questionnaire and a quiz before using the application, in the second phase they used the application and explored AR, and lastly, in the third phase, they answered a post-test questionnaire.

Figure 3 shows students exploring the AR function of the application.

Figure 3. Implementation of AR system in class.

Survey design

The survey questionnaire was divided into segments of three. The first section (A) was demographic questions; the second section (B) evaluated the two independent variables and one dependent variable, and in the third section (C) dependent factor learning performance was evaluated through a quiz developed by the subject expert.

Section A comprises of six questions regarding participants’ general information that included gender, ethnicity, age and whether they have used any educational AR application before or not. All the questions in this section were self-designed.

Section B evaluates the variables of the research framework comprised of self-developed and adopted questions from multiple sources. Independent variable human-human interaction measurement questions were self-developed. Human-human interaction questions were formed based on the idea of peer-peer interaction and student-teacher interaction shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Questionnaire of human-human interactivity factor.

Question	Pre-test	Post-test
1	This lecture facilitates interaction with peers	This application facilitates interaction with peers
2	This lecture facilitates interaction with teachers	This application facilitates interaction with teachers
3	This lecture provides opportunities to discuss with peers	This application provides opportunities to discuss with peers
4	This lecture provides opportunities to discuss with teacher	This application provides opportunities to discuss with teacher
5	This lecture allows exchange of information with peers	This application allows exchange of information with peers
6	This lecture allows exchange of information with teachers	This application allows exchange of information with teachers

For the second independent variable human-system interaction the questions were adapted from Sumadio and Rambli³⁰ and are depicted in Table 4.

Table 4. Questionnaire of human-system interactivity factor.

Question	Adopted paper	This paper
7	Easy to use	It is easy to use
8	Offers functions to solve tasks efficiently	It gives opportunity to understand the lesson more easily through AR object
9	Provides a good overview over its functionality	It provides a good overview over its functionality
10	Offers an opportunity to stop the task and continue at the same point later on	It offers an opportunity to stop the task and continue at the same point later on
11	Easy to learn without somebody help or manual	It is easy to learn without somebody’s help or manual
12	The familiarisation with gestures and manipulating virtual objects has been easy	I find the augmented object realistic
13	The three-dimensional virtual figures are clear and do not present definition difficulties	The manipulation of augmented 3D solid was smooth
14	Utilising materials (design notebook) and augmented reality technology has been easy and intuitive	It is easy to have 360 degree view by rotating the solid via finger touch

The learning experience variable was evaluated based on the adopted questionnaire from³¹ shown in Table 5 and also from the self-developed questionnaire listed in Table 6.

Table 5. Questionnaire of learning experience factor.

No	Adopted paper	Current study
15	The quality of the augmented reality material helped to hold my attention	The quality of the augmented reality material helped to hold my attention
16	The variety of audio visual material helped keep my attention on the lesson	The variety of audio visual material helped to keep my attention on the lesson
17	The content of this material is relevant to my interests	The AR content of this material was relevant to my lesson
18	The content of this material is relevant to my interests	The audio visual material in this lesson is related to my lesson
19	As I worked on this lesson, I was confident that I could learn the content	The AR and audio visual contents in IARA enabled me to learn independently
20	After working on this lesson for a while, I was confident that I would be able to pass a test on it	After working on this lesson for a while, I was confident that I would be able to pass a test on it
21	It was a pleasure to work on such a well-designed lesson	I felt good to interact with AR object
22	It was a pleasure to work on such a well-designed lesson	I enjoyed the audio visual content so much that I would like to know more about this topic
23	It was a pleasure to work on such a well-designed lesson	I felt good after sharing information through discussion platform

Table 6. Self-developed questionnaire of learning experience factor.

No	Self-developed
24	Video of object formulation through revolution of solid has deepen my understanding
25	AR object has facilitated in visualizing the solid better
26	I am satisfied with the content and function of this application

Section C was developed by a calculus subject expert in evaluating learning performance via a quiz. The quiz included True/False and formative questions.

Results

This study conducted two types of analysis through Smart PLS 3.0 and SPSS 22 (IBM SPSS Statistics, RRID: SCR_019096) for conducting structural model assessment and pre-and post-test comparison of variables respectively. R is an open-source alternative software (R Project for Statistical Computing, RRID: SCR_001905) for Smart PLS.

Descriptive statistics

Demographic profile

This study collected 55 valid responses from the selected sample of 59 students from a Malaysian private university (Table 7). Out of 55 respondents, 46 were male (83.6%) while 9 were female constituting 16.4% of total respondents. The result is in line with other research findings as the gender ratio significantly skews towards males in the technology field.³²^,³³ Among the three main ethnicity groups 43 students were Chinese (78.2%), followed by six Malay and six Indians constituting 10.9% each. As the sample was from pre-university students, the age range was from 18-22. The majority of students were 19 years old (60%) where 18 and 22 were the smallest age groups, constituting 3.6 % each.

Table 7. Demographic information.

Criterion		Frequency	Percentage
Gender	Male	46	83.6
Gender	Female	9	16.4
Race	Malay	6	10.9
	Indian	6	10.9
	Chinese	43	78.2
Age (years)	18	2	3.6
	19	33	60.0
	20	12	21.8
	21	6	10.9
	22	2	3.6

Students’ experience of using similar types of applications in learning provides an indication of whether users are experienced in using this type of application or not. It is found that none of the students had used an AR application before.

Inferential statistics

The study adopted a PLS_SEM approach to maximize the variance of the defined framework’s endogenous construct.³⁴ Structural model analysis was used to test the hypotheses along with its predictive accuracy and effect size. All the constructs were measured with five or more indicators. As the model is reflective, the constructs are reflective too. “Internal consistency reliability”, “convergent validity” and “Discriminant Validity” are the three criteria used to assess the constructs.

Internal consistent reliability

To evaluate the same source biasedness coefficient variation, Internal consistency reliability is used to investigate the reliability of indicators that measure a latent variable. From Table 8, each construct satisfied the criteria of composite reliability (CR) of ≥ 0.7.³⁵ As such it can be concluded that the constructs met the internal consistency reliability criteria.

Table 8. Convergent validity and composite reliability.

Construct	Item	Loading	CR	AVE
Human-Human Interaction	HHI1	0.678	0.886	0.564
	HHI2	0.783
	HHI3	0.771
	HHI4	0.796
	HHI5	0.724
	HHI6	0.747
Human-System Interaction	HSI1	0.665	0.886	0.526
	HSI2	0.728
	HSI3	0.8
	HSI4	0.801
	HSI5	0.683
	HSI6	0.691
	HSI7	0.697
Learning Experience	LE11	0.74	0.891	0.505
	LE12	0.69
	LE2	0.735
	LE5	0.649
	LE6	0.693
	LE7	0.732
	LE8	0.673
	LE9	0.766

Convergent validity

Convergent validity is measured by the indicator of Average Variance Extracted (AVE) and factor loading.³⁵ AVE indicates what percentage of the variance of a construct is defined by a marker.³⁵ The acceptable value of AVE for each construct must be ≥ 0.5. From the AVE value depicted in Table 8, all constructs satisfied the convergent validity criteria. Factor loading of each indicator ≥ 0.6 is acceptable.³⁶

Discriminant validity

Discriminant validity is measured by the Fornell and Larcker Criterion (FLC), cross-loading comparison and HTMT technique.³⁷ Table 9 shows that all constructs satisfied FLC criteria, where the square roots of AVEs for the reflective constructs of HHI (0.751), HSI (0.726) and LE (0.711) are larger than the correlation for all other constructs diagonally.

Table 9. Discriminant validity-fornell and larcker criterion.

	Human-Human Interaction	Human-System Interaction	Learning Experience
Human-Human Interaction	0.751
Human-System Interaction	0.565	0.726
Learning Experience	0.714	0.616	0.711

From Table 10 of cross loading, all indicators load high on their own constructs compared to others. This confirms that the constructs are distinct from each other indicating discriminant validity as a result.

Table 10. Convergent validity cross loading.

	Human-Human Interaction	Human-System Interaction	Learning Experience
HHI1	0.678	0.412	0.422
HHI2	0.783	0.466	0.552
HHI3	0.771	0.437	0.504
HHI4	0.796	0.447	0.636
HHI5	0.724	0.474	0.492
HHI6	0.747	0.326	0.574
HSI1	0.259	0.665	0.214
HSI2	0.494	0.728	0.444
HSI3	0.432	0.8	0.498
HSI4	0.377	0.801	0.33
HSI5	0.343	0.683	0.438
HSI6	0.484	0.691	0.547
HSI7	0.376	0.697	0.475
LE11	0.431	0.501	0.74
LE12	0.423	0.434	0.69
LE2	0.608	0.379	0.735
LE5	0.514	0.465	0.649
LE6	0.549	0.476	0.693
LE7	0.463	0.575	0.732
LE8	0.414	0.26	0.673
LE9	0.605	0.375	0.766

The HTMT mechanism of assessing discriminant validity requires the value of HTMT to be lower than 0.85 for stringent criterion and 0.9 for conservative criterion.³⁷ From Table 11, all the constructs satisfy the above criteria confirming discriminant validity thereof.

Table 11. Discriminant validity-HTMT.

	Human-Human Interaction	Human-System Interaction
Human-Human Interaction
Human-System Interaction	0.646
Learning Experience	0.817	0.672

From all the criteria of confirmatory factorial analysis, the research model is adequately fitting to be accepted. As such this designated measurement model with specified latent variables has been analyzed with SEM criteria.

Structural model assessment

Path analysis was performed to find the hypothesized relationship. The results for collinearity assessment and hypothesis are shown in Table 12.

Table 12. Collinearity assessment and hypothesis test.

Latent variables	VIF	Beta ß	t-value	p-value	f²
Human-Human Interaction -> Learning Experience ***	1.47	0.537	4.629	000	0.463
Human-System Interaction -> Learning Experience **	1.47	0.313	2.588	0.005	0.157

Both latent variables Human-Human Interaction (HHI) and Human-System Interaction (HSI) have positive effects on Learning Experience (LE). The variance inflation factor (VIF) results in Table 12 show that the lateral multicollinearity meets the criteria of being above the threshold of 0.2 and below the threshold of 5, implying collinearity was not an issue in the structural model.³⁵

A study by³⁵ suggested that for a one-tailed test “t-values” for a significant level of five per cent (α = 0.05) are required to be greater than 1.645. The result indicated that both exogenous constructs HHI and HSI have a “t-value” of >1.645 for a significant level of five per cent (α = 0.05). From the results, both latent variables have a positive relationship with LE, HHI being the stronger predictor than HSI.

Predictive accuracy, effect size and relevance

“Predictive accuracy” is evaluated through the “coefficient of determination, R²”. R² values imply the predictive power of exogenous constructs over endogenous ones. From the analysis construct LE’s R² value is found as 0.576 which means exogenous constructs substantially explain 57.6% of LE’s variance as predictive power can be considered as substantial if it is greater than 0.26.³⁸ Although³⁵ has stated R² value less than 0.67 is moderate.

To evaluate the effect size of exogenous constructs Cohen’s f² value was obtained from the model analysis.³⁸ stated that the f² value of 0.35 is considered a substantial effect whereas 0.15 is considered moderate. From Table 12 it can be seen that the HHI construct has a substantial effect on LE (0.463) and HSI has a moderate effect (0.157).

In addition, the Q² value of endogenous construct LE was found at 0.269 indicating moderate “predictive relevance”.³⁵ Besides, as the Q² value is larger than 0, it can be concluded that HHI and HIS exogenous constructs have “predictive relevance” for the endogenous construct LE.³⁹

Pre-test post-test

For understanding the significance of pre-and post-test performance of student paired sample t-test was carried out and the result is shown in Table 13. From Table 13 it can be concluded that there is a significant relationship between the results of the pre-and post-tests as the P<0.05.²⁹ The post-test mean implies that students’ performance results in the post-test are higher than the pre-test one signifying a positive improvement in the performance of learning.

Table 13. Pre and post test analysis of performance.

Paired samples test
		Paired differences					t	df	Sig. (2-tailed)
		Mean	Std. deviation	Std. error mean	95% confidence interval of the difference
		Mean	Std. deviation	Std. error mean	Lower	Upper
Pair 1	Pre-test Post-test	−1.43636	1.43712	.19378	−1.82487	−1.04786	−7.412	54	.000

Discussion

From the result of the hypotheses, two hypotheses, H1 and H2 were supported – the human-human factor has a larger impact than the human-system factor.

Human-human interaction through the application has a mean of 3.92 compared to human-human interaction without the application with a mean of 3.70. Human-human interaction affects the learning experience positively which is in line with results found by.¹^,²^,³^,⁴⁰

Human system interactivity from AR has also affected learning experience positively in line with the related research.¹⁴^,¹⁶^,²⁴^,⁴¹ The learning experience mean score is 3.42 prior to application usage whereas later it turned to 3.68.

From the pre-and post-test results, the learning experience has increased the mean score of students’ performances. Learning experience, because of these interactivities, has affected performance positively similarly to results found in other studies.³^,¹⁵

Conclusions

The role of interactivity in the learning experience has been established by many studies before, but implementing both human-human and human-system interactivities in an augmented reality application was overdue. This research had done exactly that and analyzed the effectiveness of the research framework by using PLS. From the results, it can be concluded that the model was fit to analyze the research framework with substantial predictive accuracy and a moderate effect size of the exogenous variable with a moderate relevance on endogenous variable LE. All three hypotheses are confirmed as P values for all three are at a satisfactory level. These results imply that human-human and human-system interactions positively affect learning experience and performance of learning as a result of an enhanced learning experience.

Competing interests

This article has obtained public disclosure approval from Multimedia University. The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Ethical considerations and consent

All the procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in adherence to the ethical policies of the University as approved by the Technology Transfer Office of Multimedia University under ethical approval number: EA0702021.

Written consent was also obtained from all individual participants involved in the study. Personal data from individuals was promised to be kept confidential and strictly restricted for use in this study only.

Grant information

Data availability

Zenodo: IARA LP Dataset. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5744960⁴²

This project contains the following underlying data:

Dataset IARA LP 01122021.xlsx (The file contains two sheets. The first one contains the indicators of three variables; Learning Experience, Human-Human Interaction and Human-System Interaction which were used for framework analysis. The second sheet includes the results of students' performance before and after using the learning system as pre-test and post-test).

Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0).

References

1. Krusche S, Seitz A, Börstler J, Bruegge B: Interactive Learning – Increasing Student Participation through Shorter Exercise Cycles. ACE’17, January 31-February 03, 2017, Geelong, VIC, Australia. 2017.
2. Lee WH, Kuo MC, Hsu CC: An In-classroom Interactive Learning Platform by Near Field Communication. 2015 8th International Conference on Ubi-Media Computing (UMEDIA). 2015; 360–364.
3. Blasco-arcas L, Buil I, Hernández-ortega B, et al.: Using clickers in class. The role of interactivity, active collaborative learning and engagement in learning. Computers & Education. 2013; 62: 102–110. Publisher Full Text
4. Lin T-Y, Chen C-F, Huang D-Y, et al.: Using Resource of Classroom and Content of Textbook to build Immersive Interactive Learning Playground. 2014 IEEE 14th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies. 2014.
5. Phadung M: Interactive E-Book Design and Development to Support Literacy Learning for Language Minority Students. World Congress on Sustainable Technologies (WCST-2015). 2015.
6. Contla PX, Kamada H, Takago D: Visual Interactive Learning System Using Image Processing About Multiple Programming Languages. 2016 IEEE 5th Global Conference on Consumer Electronics. 2016.
7. Hsiao H-S, Chen J-C: Using a gesture interactive game-based learning approach to improve preschool children ' s learning performance and motor skills. Computers & Education. 2016; 95(January): 151–162. Publisher Full Text
8. Pedersen MK, Svenningsen A, Dohn NB, et al.: DiffGame: Game-based mathematics learning for physics. 2nd International Conference on Higher Education Advances, HEAd´16, 21-23 June 2016, València, Spain. 2016.
9. Vishkaie RS, Levy RM: Bubble Play: an Interactive Learning Medium for Young Children. 2015 International Conference on Cyberworlds. 2015.
10. Zhong X, Fu H, Yu Y, et al.: Interactive learning environment based on knowledge network of geometry problems. 2015 10th International Conference on Computer Science & Education (ICCSE). 2015.
11. Herrera LM, Pérez JC, Ordóñez SJ: Developing spatial mathematical skills through 3D tools: augmented reality, virtual environments and 3D printing. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM). 2019; 1385–1399.
12. Salinas P, González-Mendívil E: Augmented Reality and Solids of Revolution. International Journal for Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM). 2017; 11: 829–837. Publisher Full Text
13. Quintero E, Salinas P, González-Mendívil E, Ramírez H: Augmented Reality app for Calculus: A Proposal for the Development of Spatial Visualization. 2015 International Conference on Virtual and Augmented Reality in Education. 2015.
14. Banu SM: Augmented reality system based on sketches for geometry education. ICEEE. 2012.
15. Corrêa AGD, Tahira A, Ribeiro JB Jr., Kitamura RKITY: Development of an interactive book with Augmented Reality for mobile learning.2013.
16. de Ravé EG , Jiménez-Hornero FJ, Ariza-Villaverde AB, et al.: DiedricAR: a mobile augmented reality system designed for the ubiquitous descriptive geometry learning. Multimedia Tools and Applications. 2016; 75: 9641–9663. Publisher Full Text
17. Kirner TG, Reis FMV, Kirner C: Development of an Interactive Book with Augmented Reality for Teaching and Learning Geometric Shapes. 7th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI), 2012. 2016.
18. Le H-Q, Kim J-I: An augmented reality application with hand gestures for learning 3D geometry. 2017 IEEE International Conference on Big Data and Smart Computing (BigComp). 2017.
19. Purnama J, Andrew D, Galinium M: Geometry Learning Tool for Elementary School using Augmented Reality. IAICT 2014, Bali 28-30 August 2014. 2014.
20. Abykanova B, Nugumanova S, Yelezhanova S, et al.: The Use of Interactive Learning Technology in Institutions of Higher Learning. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education. 2016; 12528–12539.
21. Yuanita P, Zulnaidi H, Zakaria E: The effectiveness of Realistic Mathematics Education approach: The role of mathematical representation as mediator between mathematical belief and problem solving. PLOS ONE. 2018; 13: e0204847. Publisher Full Text
22. Lucas HC: Technology and the failure of the university. Communications of the ACM. 2017.
23. Hussein Ibrahim R, Hussein DA-R: Assessment of visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learning style among undergraduate nursing students. Int. J. Adv. Nurs. Stud. 2015; 5: 1. Publisher Full Text
24. Yu C-H, Liao Y-T, Wu C-C: Using Augmented Reality to Learn the Enumeration Strategies 0f Cubes. 2016 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering (TALE). 2016.
25. Nakakoji K, Yamada K, Yamamoto Y, et al.: A conceptual framework for learning experience design. Proceedings - 1st Conference on Creating, Connecting and Collaborating Through Computing. 2003; C5: 2003.
26. Zerihun Z, Beishuizen J, van Os W : Student learning experience as indicator of teaching quality. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability. 2012.
27. Freeman S, Eddy SL, McDonough M, et al.: Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2014; pp. 8410–8415.
28. Krishnasamy S, Sook-Ling L, Tan C-K: Information Technology Capabilities for Mathematics Education in High School: Conceptual Framework. Adv. Sci. Lett. 2017; 23: 8013–8016. Publisher Full Text
29. Sekaran U, Bougie R: Research Methods for Business. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd; 2009.
30. Sumadio DD, Rambli DRA: Preliminary Evaluation on User Acceptance of the Augmented Reality. 2010 Second International Conference on Computer Engineering and Applications, Bali Island. 2010.
31. Serio ÁD, Ibáñez MB, Kloos CD: Impact of an augmented reality system on students’ motivation. Comput. Educ. 2013; 68: 586–596. Publisher Full Text
32. Reinking A, Martin B: The Gender Gap in STEM Fields: Theories, Movements, and Ideas to Engage Girls in STEM. Reinking, Anni & Martin, Barbara. (2018). The gender gap in STEM fields: Theories, movementsJournal of New Approaches in Educational Research. 2018; 148–153.
33. Wang M-T, Degol J: Gender Gap in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM): Current Knowledge, Implications for Practice, Policy, and Future Directions. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 2016; 29: 119–140. Publisher Full Text
34. Hair JF, Black W, Babin BJ, et al.: Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective. Upper Saddle River: Pearson; 2010.
35. Hair JF, Hult GTM, Ringle CM, et al.: A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publication; 2017.
36. Byrne BM: Structural Equation Modeling With AMOS Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. Routledge; 2016. Publisher Full Text
37. Ramayah T, Cheah J, Chuah F, et al.: Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) using SmartPLS 3.0: An Updated and Practical Guide to Statistical Analysis, Kuala Lumpur: Pearson Malaysia Sdn. Bhd.2018.
38. Cohen J: Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: Routledge; 1988.
39. Geisser S: A Predictive Approach to the Random Effect Model. Biometrika. 1974; 61: 101–107. Publisher Full Text
40. Lin H-C, Chiu Y-H, Chen YJ, et al.: Continued use of an interactive computer game-based visual perception learning system in children with developmental delay. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2017; 107: 76–87. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
41. Chang R-c, Yu Z-s: Application of Augmented Reality Technology to Promote Interactive Learning. Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Applied System Innovation IEEE-ICASI 2017 - Meen, Prior & Lam (Eds). 2017.
42. Ling LS: IARA LP Dataset [Data set]. Zenodo. 2021.
43. King A: Using Interactive Games to Improve Math Achievement Among Middle School Students in Need of Remediation. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. 2011.

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2

VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 14 Mar 2022

Author details Author details

¹ Faculty of Information Science and Technology, Multimedia University, Ayer Keroh, Melaka, 75450, Malaysia

Md Asifur Rahman
Roles: Data Curation, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Lew Sook Ling
Roles: Conceptualization, Funding Acquisition, Project Administration, Resources, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing

Ooi Shih Yin
Roles: Conceptualization, Project Administration, Writing – Review & Editing

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

This research is funded and supported by Multimedia University under the MMU Graduate Research Assistant (GRA) Scheme with Grant Reference Number: MMUI/170099. Md Asifur Rahman is the appointed GRA for this grant.
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Article Versions (2)

version 2

Revised

Published: 11 Mar 2024, 11:307

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.73595.2

version 1

Published: 14 Mar 2022, 11:307

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.73595.1

© 2022 Rahman MA et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Download

Export To

metrics

	Views	Downloads
F1000Research	-	-
PubMed Central Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.	-	-

Citations

SEE MORE DETAILS

CITE

how to cite this article

Rahman MA, Sook Ling L and Yin OS. Interactive Learning System for Learning Calculus [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2022, 11:307 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.73595.1)

NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

track

receive updates on this article

Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Version 1

VERSION 1

PUBLISHED 14 Mar 2022

Views

Reviewer Report 12 Apr 2022

Affandy Affandy, Faculty of Computer Science, Dian Nuswantoro University, Semarang, Indonesia

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.77256.r127478

This research explores the benefits of human interaction in interactive learning systems with visualization through augmented reality. The subject exposed is calculus on the topic "Revolution of Solids". The research compares the impact of human-system interaction support with human-human interaction support on student learning experiences.

In this paper, the author presents information that is quite valuable, however, several important things need to be detailed to get a more comprehensive point of view.

Introduction:

In this section, explanations related to the following things need to be explained to construct a more complete research motivation:

What problems are still encountered in the application of learning media based on 3D visualization with AR technology?
What systems currently exist to support learning calculus using AR and what are their weaknesses?
What are the existing systems that support visualization and interaction and what are the problems with these systems?

Literature study:

The paper needs to include an explanation of the following points to add clarity to the problem and state-of-the-art research on learning using visualization:

Utilization of AR technology in calculus learning.
Various interaction models exist in learning applications and their advantages and disadvantages.
Why visualization systems must be supported by human-human interaction in learning applications?
What prevents current AR applications from providing student-student and teacher-student interaction?

Methodology:

To ensure the homogeneity of the sample, it was mentioned in the paper that none of the students had ever used AR applications before. However, the student's initial level of understanding in the area studied before they used the provided AR applications is unknown. Different starting points have the potential to provide different endpoints as well.

Discussion:

In the discussion section, the author should not only emphasize the findings obtained from the statistical approach that has been carried out. A more in-depth study to find out what aspects make human-human interaction give better student performance results than human-system interaction needs to be presented with comparisons from previous studies.

Using previous studies as a reference in the discussion/comparison of research results will provide clarity on the contribution of research in this field of study.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

I cannot comment. A qualified statistician is required.
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: My research interest is in software engineering education, software visualization, and project management.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 13 Apr 2024

Sook Ling Lew, Faculty of Information Science and Technology, Multimedia University, Ayer Keroh, 75450, Malaysia

13 Apr 2024

Author Response

Comment 1: This research explores the benefits of human interaction in interactive learning systems with visualization through augmented reality. The subject exposed is calculus on the topic "Revolution of Solids". ... Continue reading Comment 1: This research explores the benefits of human interaction in interactive learning systems with visualization through augmented reality. The subject exposed is calculus on the topic "Revolution of Solids". The research compares the impact of human-system interaction support with human-human interaction support on student learning experiences.
In this paper, the author presents information that is quite valuable, however, several important things need to be detailed to get a more comprehensive point of view.
Response 1: We have revised the manuscript carefully based on all the comments and issues raised.

Comment 2: Introduction:
In this section, explanations related to the following things need to be explained to construct a more complete research motivation:
What problems are still encountered in the application of learning media based on 3D visualization with AR technology?
Response 2: The problems are included as follows:
(1)    Lacking Human-Human interactivity.
Introduction – Paragraph 1:
Although there are some studies that have addressed the issues of student interaction with the system there is still a lack of teacher-student or student-student interaction in interactive learning systems [1, 2, 3]. Many systems have promoted a single type of interactivity [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10].
Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 1:
Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity.
Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 2:
Past studies in Table 2 depicts that most systems solely focused on interactivity through AR and not implementing any human-human interactivity.
(2)    Lacking Spatial Visualization
Introduction – Paragraph 2:
Application of integration is one of the chapters in Calculus that requires spatial visualization and the 2D medium of the traditional classroom does not provide a proper solution [11, 12, 13].
Introduction – Paragraph 3:
After consulting with the subject teacher on what the student struggle most in learning calculus, it was suggested that students face difficulties in understanding solid of revolution through traditional classroom method as it requires 3D visualization.

Comment 3: What systems currently exist to support learning calculus using AR and what are their weaknesses?
Response 3: Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 1:
The existing interactive methods proposed to overcome these problems are included as:
AR based interactive book [5] is a tool used in asynchronous learning. Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity.

Introduction – Paragraph 4:
Advantages of the existing methods are included as:
Interactive technology has made learning more personalized and kept students engaged through various applications [23]. This paper also suggested that interactive technology can make learning more active, and intensive for students where students can communicate easily with each-others and also with the teacher [23].

Disadvantages of the existing methods are included as:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 4: What are the existing systems that support visualization and interaction and what are the problems with these systems?
Response 4: Introduction – Paragraph 3:
Although researchers have implemented AR to assist in visualization, they are mainly focused on human-system interaction, either through haptic or non-haptic interaction [14, 15, 16, 17]. Besides, agility is another issue that some systems could not addresses as they are desktop-based systems [17, 18, 19]. Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20]. So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners.

Comment 5: Literature study:
The paper needs to include an explanation of the following points to add clarity to the problem and state-of-the-art research on learning using visualization:
Utilization of AR technology in calculus learning.
Response 5: Advantages of the existing methods are included as:
Interactive technology has made learning more personalized and kept students engaged through various applications [23]. This paper also suggested that interactive technology can make learning more active, and intensive for students where students can communicate easily with each-others and also with the teacher [23].

Disadvantages of the existing methods are included as:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 6: Various interaction models exist in learning applications and their advantages and disadvantages.
Response 6: Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20] . So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners. Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22].

Comment 7: Why visualization systems must be supported by human-human interaction in learning applications?
Response 7: Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20] . So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners.

Comment 8: What prevents current AR applications from providing student-student and teacher-student interaction?
Response 8: The current AR applications emphasized on immersive learning experience through AR that lacking in providing student-student and teacher-student interaction. The information is included as follows:

Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 9: Methodology:
To ensure the homogeneity of the sample, it was mentioned in the paper that none of the students had ever used AR applications before. However, the student's initial level of understanding in the area studied before they used the provided AR applications is unknown. Different starting points have the potential to provide different endpoints as well.
Response 9: Homogeneity of the sample is included as follows:
Methods-Research Design and Participants
This study conducted a pre-assessment evaluation of the respondents' knowledge, skills, or understanding in the AR area related to the system before they started using it [32].

Descriptive Statistics-Demographic Profile
It is found that the students scored the same grades in this pre-assessment, indicating that they had the same initial level of understanding in the studied area before using the system.

Comment 10: Discussion:
In the discussion section, the author should not only emphasize the findings obtained from the statistical approach that has been carried out. A more in-depth study to find out what aspects make human-human interaction give better student performance results than human-system interaction needs to be presented with comparisons from previous studies.
Response 10: The discussion was rewritten with comparisons from previous studies as follows:
The study aims to develop an augmented reality application that promotes interaction and spatial visualization for learning calculus and evaluates the effect of the interactive learning system on the performance of learning. Human-human interaction is evaluated as part of the chat function of application and human-system interaction is analysed as part of augmented reality implementation through mobile application.

The first hypothesis was accepted as human-system interactivity positively affected the learning experience factor. As this study developed an augmented reality application for learning calculus, here human-system interaction is related to the interactivity promoted by the augmented reality application. Studies implementing augmented reality in improving learning experience founds that the didactic experience of this technology make students more engaged and hence providing an enriched learning experience [12, 14, 16, 21, 27]. This study has also found that among the human-system interaction all students univocally cancelled out disagreement that it provided them with real world 3D object feelings. The study using similar questionnaire have also found that it has significant impact on the learning experience in general and motivation in particular [39]. So, the result of this study is aligned with the prior relevant studies.

The second hypothesis result found that human-human interaction significantly influences learning experience. The implication from this hypothesis acceptance indicate that learning experience is shaped by human-human interaction which can comes from student-teacher or student-student. In the study design both student-teacher and student-student interaction facilities were provided via application chat function. So, it can be said that both type of human-human interactions are associated positively with learning experience. This result is in line with the findings where both types of interaction led to learning satisfaction [47]. Another study found that human-human interactivity increases learning engagement [1, 2, 3]. In addition to that another study has also claimed that learning confidence as part of learning experience has also increased through interaction with peers and teachers [1]. From the findings of these research, it can be concluded that the result of human-human interaction affecting learning experience is in line with existing research.

The third hypothesis of the study was tested by using paired sample “t-test” where learning performance means were compared from ‘pre-test’ to ‘post-test scenario. The result shows that there is significant relation between the score and “post-test” mean is higher than the ‘pre-test’ one. Other studies have also found that learning experience as result of human-system and human-human interactivity increase learning performance [3, 15, 47]. So, it can be claimed that in terms of hypothesis acceptance, this study is in line with existing literature.

Comment 11: Using previous studies as a reference in the discussion/comparison of research results will provide clarity on the contribution of research in this field of study.
Response 11: The discussion was rewritten with comparisons from previous studies as above in Response 10.
Comment 1: This research explores the benefits of human interaction in interactive learning systems with visualization through augmented reality. The subject exposed is calculus on the topic "Revolution of Solids". The research compares the impact of human-system interaction support with human-human interaction support on student learning experiences.
In this paper, the author presents information that is quite valuable, however, several important things need to be detailed to get a more comprehensive point of view.
Response 1: We have revised the manuscript carefully based on all the comments and issues raised.

Comment 2: Introduction:
In this section, explanations related to the following things need to be explained to construct a more complete research motivation:
What problems are still encountered in the application of learning media based on 3D visualization with AR technology?
Response 2: The problems are included as follows:
(1)    Lacking Human-Human interactivity.
Introduction – Paragraph 1:
Although there are some studies that have addressed the issues of student interaction with the system there is still a lack of teacher-student or student-student interaction in interactive learning systems [1, 2, 3]. Many systems have promoted a single type of interactivity [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10].
Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 1:
Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity.
Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 2:
Past studies in Table 2 depicts that most systems solely focused on interactivity through AR and not implementing any human-human interactivity.
(2)    Lacking Spatial Visualization
Introduction – Paragraph 2:
Application of integration is one of the chapters in Calculus that requires spatial visualization and the 2D medium of the traditional classroom does not provide a proper solution [11, 12, 13].
Introduction – Paragraph 3:
After consulting with the subject teacher on what the student struggle most in learning calculus, it was suggested that students face difficulties in understanding solid of revolution through traditional classroom method as it requires 3D visualization.

Comment 3: What systems currently exist to support learning calculus using AR and what are their weaknesses?
Response 3: Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 1:
The existing interactive methods proposed to overcome these problems are included as:
AR based interactive book [5] is a tool used in asynchronous learning. Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity.

Introduction – Paragraph 4:
Advantages of the existing methods are included as:
Interactive technology has made learning more personalized and kept students engaged through various applications [23]. This paper also suggested that interactive technology can make learning more active, and intensive for students where students can communicate easily with each-others and also with the teacher [23].

Disadvantages of the existing methods are included as:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 4: What are the existing systems that support visualization and interaction and what are the problems with these systems?
Response 4: Introduction – Paragraph 3:
Although researchers have implemented AR to assist in visualization, they are mainly focused on human-system interaction, either through haptic or non-haptic interaction [14, 15, 16, 17]. Besides, agility is another issue that some systems could not addresses as they are desktop-based systems [17, 18, 19]. Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20]. So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners.

Comment 5: Literature study:
The paper needs to include an explanation of the following points to add clarity to the problem and state-of-the-art research on learning using visualization:
Utilization of AR technology in calculus learning.
Response 5: Advantages of the existing methods are included as:
Interactive technology has made learning more personalized and kept students engaged through various applications [23]. This paper also suggested that interactive technology can make learning more active, and intensive for students where students can communicate easily with each-others and also with the teacher [23].

Disadvantages of the existing methods are included as:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 6: Various interaction models exist in learning applications and their advantages and disadvantages.
Response 6: Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20] . So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners. Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22].

Comment 7: Why visualization systems must be supported by human-human interaction in learning applications?
Response 7: Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20] . So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners.

Comment 8: What prevents current AR applications from providing student-student and teacher-student interaction?
Response 8: The current AR applications emphasized on immersive learning experience through AR that lacking in providing student-student and teacher-student interaction. The information is included as follows:

Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 9: Methodology:
To ensure the homogeneity of the sample, it was mentioned in the paper that none of the students had ever used AR applications before. However, the student's initial level of understanding in the area studied before they used the provided AR applications is unknown. Different starting points have the potential to provide different endpoints as well.
Response 9: Homogeneity of the sample is included as follows:
Methods-Research Design and Participants
This study conducted a pre-assessment evaluation of the respondents' knowledge, skills, or understanding in the AR area related to the system before they started using it [32].

Descriptive Statistics-Demographic Profile
It is found that the students scored the same grades in this pre-assessment, indicating that they had the same initial level of understanding in the studied area before using the system.

Comment 10: Discussion:
In the discussion section, the author should not only emphasize the findings obtained from the statistical approach that has been carried out. A more in-depth study to find out what aspects make human-human interaction give better student performance results than human-system interaction needs to be presented with comparisons from previous studies.
Response 10: The discussion was rewritten with comparisons from previous studies as follows:
The study aims to develop an augmented reality application that promotes interaction and spatial visualization for learning calculus and evaluates the effect of the interactive learning system on the performance of learning. Human-human interaction is evaluated as part of the chat function of application and human-system interaction is analysed as part of augmented reality implementation through mobile application.

The first hypothesis was accepted as human-system interactivity positively affected the learning experience factor. As this study developed an augmented reality application for learning calculus, here human-system interaction is related to the interactivity promoted by the augmented reality application. Studies implementing augmented reality in improving learning experience founds that the didactic experience of this technology make students more engaged and hence providing an enriched learning experience [12, 14, 16, 21, 27]. This study has also found that among the human-system interaction all students univocally cancelled out disagreement that it provided them with real world 3D object feelings. The study using similar questionnaire have also found that it has significant impact on the learning experience in general and motivation in particular [39]. So, the result of this study is aligned with the prior relevant studies.

The second hypothesis result found that human-human interaction significantly influences learning experience. The implication from this hypothesis acceptance indicate that learning experience is shaped by human-human interaction which can comes from student-teacher or student-student. In the study design both student-teacher and student-student interaction facilities were provided via application chat function. So, it can be said that both type of human-human interactions are associated positively with learning experience. This result is in line with the findings where both types of interaction led to learning satisfaction [47]. Another study found that human-human interactivity increases learning engagement [1, 2, 3]. In addition to that another study has also claimed that learning confidence as part of learning experience has also increased through interaction with peers and teachers [1]. From the findings of these research, it can be concluded that the result of human-human interaction affecting learning experience is in line with existing research.

The third hypothesis of the study was tested by using paired sample “t-test” where learning performance means were compared from ‘pre-test’ to ‘post-test scenario. The result shows that there is significant relation between the score and “post-test” mean is higher than the ‘pre-test’ one. Other studies have also found that learning experience as result of human-system and human-human interactivity increase learning performance [3, 15, 47]. So, it can be claimed that in terms of hypothesis acceptance, this study is in line with existing literature.

Comment 11: Using previous studies as a reference in the discussion/comparison of research results will provide clarity on the contribution of research in this field of study.
Response 11: The discussion was rewritten with comparisons from previous studies as above in Response 10.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 13 Apr 2024

Sook Ling Lew, Faculty of Information Science and Technology, Multimedia University, Ayer Keroh, 75450, Malaysia

13 Apr 2024

Author Response

Comment 1: This research explores the benefits of human interaction in interactive learning systems with visualization through augmented reality. The subject exposed is calculus on the topic "Revolution of Solids". ... Continue reading Comment 1: This research explores the benefits of human interaction in interactive learning systems with visualization through augmented reality. The subject exposed is calculus on the topic "Revolution of Solids". The research compares the impact of human-system interaction support with human-human interaction support on student learning experiences.
In this paper, the author presents information that is quite valuable, however, several important things need to be detailed to get a more comprehensive point of view.
Response 1: We have revised the manuscript carefully based on all the comments and issues raised.

Comment 2: Introduction:
In this section, explanations related to the following things need to be explained to construct a more complete research motivation:
What problems are still encountered in the application of learning media based on 3D visualization with AR technology?
Response 2: The problems are included as follows:
(1)    Lacking Human-Human interactivity.
Introduction – Paragraph 1:
Although there are some studies that have addressed the issues of student interaction with the system there is still a lack of teacher-student or student-student interaction in interactive learning systems [1, 2, 3]. Many systems have promoted a single type of interactivity [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10].
Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 1:
Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity.
Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 2:
Past studies in Table 2 depicts that most systems solely focused on interactivity through AR and not implementing any human-human interactivity.
(2)    Lacking Spatial Visualization
Introduction – Paragraph 2:
Application of integration is one of the chapters in Calculus that requires spatial visualization and the 2D medium of the traditional classroom does not provide a proper solution [11, 12, 13].
Introduction – Paragraph 3:
After consulting with the subject teacher on what the student struggle most in learning calculus, it was suggested that students face difficulties in understanding solid of revolution through traditional classroom method as it requires 3D visualization.

Comment 3: What systems currently exist to support learning calculus using AR and what are their weaknesses?
Response 3: Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 1:
The existing interactive methods proposed to overcome these problems are included as:
AR based interactive book [5] is a tool used in asynchronous learning. Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity.

Introduction – Paragraph 4:
Advantages of the existing methods are included as:
Interactive technology has made learning more personalized and kept students engaged through various applications [23]. This paper also suggested that interactive technology can make learning more active, and intensive for students where students can communicate easily with each-others and also with the teacher [23].

Disadvantages of the existing methods are included as:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 4: What are the existing systems that support visualization and interaction and what are the problems with these systems?
Response 4: Introduction – Paragraph 3:
Although researchers have implemented AR to assist in visualization, they are mainly focused on human-system interaction, either through haptic or non-haptic interaction [14, 15, 16, 17]. Besides, agility is another issue that some systems could not addresses as they are desktop-based systems [17, 18, 19]. Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20]. So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners.

Comment 5: Literature study:
The paper needs to include an explanation of the following points to add clarity to the problem and state-of-the-art research on learning using visualization:
Utilization of AR technology in calculus learning.
Response 5: Advantages of the existing methods are included as:
Interactive technology has made learning more personalized and kept students engaged through various applications [23]. This paper also suggested that interactive technology can make learning more active, and intensive for students where students can communicate easily with each-others and also with the teacher [23].

Disadvantages of the existing methods are included as:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 6: Various interaction models exist in learning applications and their advantages and disadvantages.
Response 6: Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20] . So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners. Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22].

Comment 7: Why visualization systems must be supported by human-human interaction in learning applications?
Response 7: Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20] . So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners.

Comment 8: What prevents current AR applications from providing student-student and teacher-student interaction?
Response 8: The current AR applications emphasized on immersive learning experience through AR that lacking in providing student-student and teacher-student interaction. The information is included as follows:

Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 9: Methodology:
To ensure the homogeneity of the sample, it was mentioned in the paper that none of the students had ever used AR applications before. However, the student's initial level of understanding in the area studied before they used the provided AR applications is unknown. Different starting points have the potential to provide different endpoints as well.
Response 9: Homogeneity of the sample is included as follows:
Methods-Research Design and Participants
This study conducted a pre-assessment evaluation of the respondents' knowledge, skills, or understanding in the AR area related to the system before they started using it [32].

Descriptive Statistics-Demographic Profile
It is found that the students scored the same grades in this pre-assessment, indicating that they had the same initial level of understanding in the studied area before using the system.

Comment 10: Discussion:
In the discussion section, the author should not only emphasize the findings obtained from the statistical approach that has been carried out. A more in-depth study to find out what aspects make human-human interaction give better student performance results than human-system interaction needs to be presented with comparisons from previous studies.
Response 10: The discussion was rewritten with comparisons from previous studies as follows:
The study aims to develop an augmented reality application that promotes interaction and spatial visualization for learning calculus and evaluates the effect of the interactive learning system on the performance of learning. Human-human interaction is evaluated as part of the chat function of application and human-system interaction is analysed as part of augmented reality implementation through mobile application.

The first hypothesis was accepted as human-system interactivity positively affected the learning experience factor. As this study developed an augmented reality application for learning calculus, here human-system interaction is related to the interactivity promoted by the augmented reality application. Studies implementing augmented reality in improving learning experience founds that the didactic experience of this technology make students more engaged and hence providing an enriched learning experience [12, 14, 16, 21, 27]. This study has also found that among the human-system interaction all students univocally cancelled out disagreement that it provided them with real world 3D object feelings. The study using similar questionnaire have also found that it has significant impact on the learning experience in general and motivation in particular [39]. So, the result of this study is aligned with the prior relevant studies.

The second hypothesis result found that human-human interaction significantly influences learning experience. The implication from this hypothesis acceptance indicate that learning experience is shaped by human-human interaction which can comes from student-teacher or student-student. In the study design both student-teacher and student-student interaction facilities were provided via application chat function. So, it can be said that both type of human-human interactions are associated positively with learning experience. This result is in line with the findings where both types of interaction led to learning satisfaction [47]. Another study found that human-human interactivity increases learning engagement [1, 2, 3]. In addition to that another study has also claimed that learning confidence as part of learning experience has also increased through interaction with peers and teachers [1]. From the findings of these research, it can be concluded that the result of human-human interaction affecting learning experience is in line with existing research.

The third hypothesis of the study was tested by using paired sample “t-test” where learning performance means were compared from ‘pre-test’ to ‘post-test scenario. The result shows that there is significant relation between the score and “post-test” mean is higher than the ‘pre-test’ one. Other studies have also found that learning experience as result of human-system and human-human interactivity increase learning performance [3, 15, 47]. So, it can be claimed that in terms of hypothesis acceptance, this study is in line with existing literature.

Comment 11: Using previous studies as a reference in the discussion/comparison of research results will provide clarity on the contribution of research in this field of study.
Response 11: The discussion was rewritten with comparisons from previous studies as above in Response 10.
Comment 1: This research explores the benefits of human interaction in interactive learning systems with visualization through augmented reality. The subject exposed is calculus on the topic "Revolution of Solids". The research compares the impact of human-system interaction support with human-human interaction support on student learning experiences.
In this paper, the author presents information that is quite valuable, however, several important things need to be detailed to get a more comprehensive point of view.
Response 1: We have revised the manuscript carefully based on all the comments and issues raised.

Comment 2: Introduction:
In this section, explanations related to the following things need to be explained to construct a more complete research motivation:
What problems are still encountered in the application of learning media based on 3D visualization with AR technology?
Response 2: The problems are included as follows:
(1)    Lacking Human-Human interactivity.
Introduction – Paragraph 1:
Although there are some studies that have addressed the issues of student interaction with the system there is still a lack of teacher-student or student-student interaction in interactive learning systems [1, 2, 3]. Many systems have promoted a single type of interactivity [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10].
Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 1:
Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity.
Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 2:
Past studies in Table 2 depicts that most systems solely focused on interactivity through AR and not implementing any human-human interactivity.
(2)    Lacking Spatial Visualization
Introduction – Paragraph 2:
Application of integration is one of the chapters in Calculus that requires spatial visualization and the 2D medium of the traditional classroom does not provide a proper solution [11, 12, 13].
Introduction – Paragraph 3:
After consulting with the subject teacher on what the student struggle most in learning calculus, it was suggested that students face difficulties in understanding solid of revolution through traditional classroom method as it requires 3D visualization.

Comment 3: What systems currently exist to support learning calculus using AR and what are their weaknesses?
Response 3: Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 1:
The existing interactive methods proposed to overcome these problems are included as:
AR based interactive book [5] is a tool used in asynchronous learning. Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity.

Introduction – Paragraph 4:
Advantages of the existing methods are included as:
Interactive technology has made learning more personalized and kept students engaged through various applications [23]. This paper also suggested that interactive technology can make learning more active, and intensive for students where students can communicate easily with each-others and also with the teacher [23].

Disadvantages of the existing methods are included as:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 4: What are the existing systems that support visualization and interaction and what are the problems with these systems?
Response 4: Introduction – Paragraph 3:
Although researchers have implemented AR to assist in visualization, they are mainly focused on human-system interaction, either through haptic or non-haptic interaction [14, 15, 16, 17]. Besides, agility is another issue that some systems could not addresses as they are desktop-based systems [17, 18, 19]. Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20]. So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners.

Comment 5: Literature study:
The paper needs to include an explanation of the following points to add clarity to the problem and state-of-the-art research on learning using visualization:
Utilization of AR technology in calculus learning.
Response 5: Advantages of the existing methods are included as:
Interactive technology has made learning more personalized and kept students engaged through various applications [23]. This paper also suggested that interactive technology can make learning more active, and intensive for students where students can communicate easily with each-others and also with the teacher [23].

Disadvantages of the existing methods are included as:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 6: Various interaction models exist in learning applications and their advantages and disadvantages.
Response 6: Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20] . So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners. Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22].

Comment 7: Why visualization systems must be supported by human-human interaction in learning applications?
Response 7: Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20] . So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners.

Comment 8: What prevents current AR applications from providing student-student and teacher-student interaction?
Response 8: The current AR applications emphasized on immersive learning experience through AR that lacking in providing student-student and teacher-student interaction. The information is included as follows:

Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 9: Methodology:
To ensure the homogeneity of the sample, it was mentioned in the paper that none of the students had ever used AR applications before. However, the student's initial level of understanding in the area studied before they used the provided AR applications is unknown. Different starting points have the potential to provide different endpoints as well.
Response 9: Homogeneity of the sample is included as follows:
Methods-Research Design and Participants
This study conducted a pre-assessment evaluation of the respondents' knowledge, skills, or understanding in the AR area related to the system before they started using it [32].

Descriptive Statistics-Demographic Profile
It is found that the students scored the same grades in this pre-assessment, indicating that they had the same initial level of understanding in the studied area before using the system.

Comment 10: Discussion:
In the discussion section, the author should not only emphasize the findings obtained from the statistical approach that has been carried out. A more in-depth study to find out what aspects make human-human interaction give better student performance results than human-system interaction needs to be presented with comparisons from previous studies.
Response 10: The discussion was rewritten with comparisons from previous studies as follows:
The study aims to develop an augmented reality application that promotes interaction and spatial visualization for learning calculus and evaluates the effect of the interactive learning system on the performance of learning. Human-human interaction is evaluated as part of the chat function of application and human-system interaction is analysed as part of augmented reality implementation through mobile application.

The first hypothesis was accepted as human-system interactivity positively affected the learning experience factor. As this study developed an augmented reality application for learning calculus, here human-system interaction is related to the interactivity promoted by the augmented reality application. Studies implementing augmented reality in improving learning experience founds that the didactic experience of this technology make students more engaged and hence providing an enriched learning experience [12, 14, 16, 21, 27]. This study has also found that among the human-system interaction all students univocally cancelled out disagreement that it provided them with real world 3D object feelings. The study using similar questionnaire have also found that it has significant impact on the learning experience in general and motivation in particular [39]. So, the result of this study is aligned with the prior relevant studies.

The second hypothesis result found that human-human interaction significantly influences learning experience. The implication from this hypothesis acceptance indicate that learning experience is shaped by human-human interaction which can comes from student-teacher or student-student. In the study design both student-teacher and student-student interaction facilities were provided via application chat function. So, it can be said that both type of human-human interactions are associated positively with learning experience. This result is in line with the findings where both types of interaction led to learning satisfaction [47]. Another study found that human-human interactivity increases learning engagement [1, 2, 3]. In addition to that another study has also claimed that learning confidence as part of learning experience has also increased through interaction with peers and teachers [1]. From the findings of these research, it can be concluded that the result of human-human interaction affecting learning experience is in line with existing research.

The third hypothesis of the study was tested by using paired sample “t-test” where learning performance means were compared from ‘pre-test’ to ‘post-test scenario. The result shows that there is significant relation between the score and “post-test” mean is higher than the ‘pre-test’ one. Other studies have also found that learning experience as result of human-system and human-human interactivity increase learning performance [3, 15, 47]. So, it can be claimed that in terms of hypothesis acceptance, this study is in line with existing literature.

Comment 11: Using previous studies as a reference in the discussion/comparison of research results will provide clarity on the contribution of research in this field of study.
Response 11: The discussion was rewritten with comparisons from previous studies as above in Response 10.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern

Views

Reviewer Report 28 Mar 2022

Yong Wee Sek, Fakulti Teknologi Maklumat dan Komunikasi, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia, Melaka, Malaysia

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.77256.r127477

In this paper, the authors introduced the interactive learning system for learning Calculus. There is a great deal of good work in this paper. However, it does require a significant overall revision to make the best of this and present the work in a clear and well-structured way, particularly on the literature review, methodology, research design and procedures used in this study, measurement instruments, and data analysis techniques in order to achieve the research objectives. Additionally, the discussion section is not exhaustive enough to provide good attempt to explain many of the study results. In fact, the discussion is not aligned with the research objectives.

Abstract

Background – the problems of the interactive system are not clear. The authors should point out the existing problems of the interactive system in learning mathematics, particularly in learning Calculus.

Please include the main objective(s) or research question(s) of this study in this section. The research objectives/research questions are not clear.

Introduction

This section should include the following information:

What are the existing problems in learning Calculus?
Why is “Revolution of Solids” proposed in this research?
Why is an interactive approach proposed to overcome these problems?
What are the existing interactive methods that have been proposed to solve Mathematics problem, in particular Calculus (Revolution of Solids)?
What are the weaknesses of existing interactive methods in solving mathematics (Calculus - Revolution of Solids) problems?
How are the proposed interactive methods (augmented reality and chat functions) able to solve the existing problem in learning Revolution of Solids?

Please include the main objective(s)/research questions of this study in this section.

Include a brief description of the methodology and system used in this study.

Literature review/Background study

In this section, discussion on the following should be included:

The major problems in learning calculus (visualization)
How are the interactive activities able to solve the existing problem in learning calculus?
What are the existing interactive methods proposed to overcome these problems? Should discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the existing methods.
What are the major issues of the existing interactive methods?
Why are AR and chat functions introduced in learning calculus?

Methodology

The author may consider sub-dividing this section as suggested below:

Study design and procedures
The design and development of the interactive methods
Participants
Measurement scales
Data analysis techniques

Study design and procedures – you should discuss the choice of quantitative research method in this research, what is the quasi-experimental design? Why is quasi-experimental design used in this research? What are the procedures used to conduct this research?

A discussion on the design and development of the interactive methods should be presented here.

Participants – this study uses quasi-experimental design, the participants should be assigned into control and experimental group. This information is not available. How did you assign participants into these groups? How did you select the participants for this study?

For measurement items, what are the scales used in this study? Please list the sources. For the self-developed items, reliability and validity tests should be conducted and reported.

What is the structural equation modelling (SEM)? Why is SEM used in this research? How did you conduct the data analysis? You should also discuss the data analysis for longitudinal study using SEM.

Results

As the measurement items were adopted from many different sources, instrument reliability and validity tests using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) should be conducted and reported.

For self-developed items, procedures to establish instrument reliability and validity should be presented.

The result section needs to do a major revision with appropriate analyses. Please include relevant Table(s) with appropriate details such as paired t test results, significant value, etc. for each of the test conducted.

Discussions

The author(s) should discuss/relate/compare the findings with prior relevant studies. Please also explain how the results in this study relate to previous findings, whether in support, contradiction, or simply as added data. The discussion should be aligned with the research objectives.

Additional comments:

Page 5, figure 1. Research design - Causal not casual relationship
The development of research hypotheses is missing.
Did not justify the adopted questionnaire.
Did not specify the questions for the quiz. Are the same or different sets of questions used for pre and post? How many questions?
Did not mention if measurement model and structural model were assessed based on data collected in the first phase or the third phase?
Ensure consistency in reporting the number of decimals throughout the manuscript (including in Tables).
Please provide information about the ethical applications
Please refer to the article entitled "Designing and evaluating a high interactive augmented reality system for programming learning"¹. This paper will provide some ideas on how to conduct quasi-experimental design, research procedures, and how the discussion was presented.
For the article entitled "Primary school students' perceptions of scaffolding in digital game-based learning in mathematics"², This paper can give some information about the process of the research experiment, ethical considerations, and how the discussion was presented.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

References

1. Yi-Ming Kao G, Ruan C: Designing and evaluating a high interactive augmented reality system for programming learning. Computers in Human Behavior. 2022; 132. Publisher Full Text
2. Sun L, Ruokamo H, Siklander P, Li B, et al.: Primary school students' perceptions of scaffolding in digital game-based learning in mathematics. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction. 2021; 28. Publisher Full Text

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: My research interest is in educational technologies, technology acceptance and information system

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 13 Apr 2024

Sook Ling Lew, Faculty of Information Science and Technology, Multimedia University, Ayer Keroh, 75450, Malaysia

13 Apr 2024

Author Response
Comment 1: In this paper, the authors introduced the interactive learning system for learning Calculus. There is a great deal of good work in this paper. However, it does require ... Continue reading
Comment 1: In this paper, the authors introduced the interactive learning system for learning Calculus. There is a great deal of good work in this paper. However, it does require a significant overall revision to make the best of this and present the work in a clear and well-structured way, particularly on the literature review, the methodology, the research design and procedures used in this study, measurement instruments and data analysis techniques to achieve the research objectives. Additionally, the discussion section is not exhaustive to provide good attempt to explain many of the study results. In fact, the discussion is not aligned with the research objectives.
Response 1: We have revised the manuscript carefully based on all the comments and issues raised.

Comment 2: Abstract
Background – the problems of the interactive system are not clear. The authors should point out the existing problems of the interactive system in learning mathematics, particularly in learning Calculus.
Please include the main objective(s) or research question(s) of this study in this section. The research objectives/research questions are not clear.
Response 2: Existing problems of the interactive system in learning mathematics, particularly in learning Calculus are added as follows:
However, calculus learning augmented reality application has limitation in promoting a human collaboration in learning.
The main objective is included in Purpose and Introduction:
This research develops an augmented reality application that promotes interaction and spatial visualization for learning calculus and evaluates the effect of the interactive learning system on the performance of learning.

Comment 3: Introduction
This section should include the following information:
Response 3: The existing problems in learning Calculus are included Introduction – Paragraph 1, 2, 3, Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 1 & Paragraph 2; as follows:

Comment 4: What are the existing problems in learning Calculus?
Response 4:
1.       Lacking Human-Human interactivity.
Although there are some studies that have addressed the issues of student interaction with the system there is still a lack of teacher-student or student-student interaction in interactive learning systems [1, 2, 3]. Many systems have promoted a single type of interactivity [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]. Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity. Past studies in Table 2 depicts that most systems solely focused on interactivity through AR and not implementing any human-human interactivity.

2.       Lacking Spatial Visualization
Application of integration is one of the chapters in Calculus that requires spatial visualization and the 2D medium of the traditional classroom does not provide a proper solution [11, 12, 13]. After consulting with the subject teacher on what the student struggle most in learning calculus, it was suggested that students face difficulties in understanding solid of revolution through traditional classroom method as it requires 3D visualization.

Comment 5: Why “Revolution of Solids” is proposed in this research?
Response 5: The reasons of “Revolution of Solids” are included as follows:
In understanding revolution of solids around an axis, visualization of the solid in-question is very important. Spatially related 3D images cannot be drawn on a 2D board or projected over a computer. These hinder students in visualizing the solid and result in difficulties in conceptualizing the concept.

After consulting with the subject teacher on what the student struggle most in learning calculus, it was suggested that students face difficulties in understanding solid of revolution through traditional classroom method as it requires 3D visualization.

Comment 6: Why interactive approach is proposed to overcome these problems?
Response 6: The reasons of interactive approach are included as follows:
Although researchers have implemented AR to assist in visualization, they are mainly focused on human-system interaction, either through haptic or non-haptic interaction [14, 15, 16, 17]. Besides, agility is another issue that some systems could not addresses as they are desktop-based systems [17, 18, 19]. Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20]. So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners.

Comment 7: What are the existing interactive methods have been proposed to solve Mathematics problem in particular Calculus (Revolution of Solids)?
Response 7: The existing interactive methods are focused on providing content visualization and included in the Introduction as follows:

Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22]. As such, developing an interactive AR application that facilitates both human-human and human-system interactivities and assists in conceptualizing and understanding math better is needed.

Comment 8: What are the weaknesses of the existing interactive methods in solving mathematics (Calculus- Revolution of Solids) problems?
Response 8: The weaknesses of the existing interactive methods are included in Introduction – Paragraph 4 as follows:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 9: How are the proposed interactive methods (augmented reality and chat functions) able to solve the existing problem in learning Revolution of Solids?
Response 9: Introduction – Paragraph 3
So, it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners. Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interactions.
The interactive methods (augmented reality and chat functions) are proposed as follows:
1.       AR – to implement Spatial Visualization
2. Chat – to improve Human-Human interactivity.

Comment 10: Please include the main objective(s)/ research questions of this study in this section.
Response 10: Main objectives are included as follows:
This research aims to develop an interactive AR application for learning calculus that promotes human-system interaction via AR and human-human interaction through chat functions.

Comment 11: Include a brief description of the methodology and system used in this study.
Response 11: A brief description of the methodology and system used in this study are included as follows:
Pre-test and post-test data from students learning calculus in the classroom using the AR interactive learning system were gathered using a questionnaire and a quiz to evaluate the impact of the developed AR system.

Comment 12: Literature review/Background study
In this section, discussion on the following should be included:
Major problems in learning calculus (visualization)
Response 12: Discussion on the major problems in learning calculus (visualization) are included as follows:
1.       Lacking Human-Human interactivity.
2.       Lacking Spatial Visualization

Comment 13: How are the interactive activities able to solve the existing problem in learning calculus?
Response 13: Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20]. So, it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners. Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22].

Comment 14: What are the existing interactive methods proposed to overcome these problems? Should discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the existing methods.
Response 14: The existing interactive methods proposed to overcome these problems are included as:
AR based interactive book [5] is a tool used in asynchronous learning. Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity.

Advantages of the existing methods are included as:
Interactive technology has made learning more personalized and kept students engaged through various applications [23]. This paper also suggested that interactive technology can make learning more active, and intensive for students where students can communicate easily with each-others and also with the teacher [23].

Disadvantages of the existing methods are included as:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 15: What are the major issues of the existing interactive methods?
Response 15: Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22].
Past studies in Table 2 depicts that most systems solely focused on interactivity through AR and not implementing any human-human interactivity.

Comment 16: Why are AR and chat functions introduced in learning calculus?
Response 16: The interactive AR application facilitates both human-human and human-system interactivities and assists in conceptualizing and understanding math better.

Comment 17: Methodology
The author may consider sub-dividing this section as below:
i.        Study design and procedures
ii.            The design and development of the interactive methods
iii.            Participants
iv.            Measurement scales
v.             Data analysis techniques
Response 17: We have re-arranged the sub-sections with the suggested sections such as Study design and procedures, Research Framework, Survey Design and Procedures and Data Analysis Techniques in Methodology.

Comment 18: Study design and procedures – you should discuss the choice of quantitative research method in this research, what is the quasi-experimental design? Why is quasi-experimental design used in this research? What are the procedures to conduct this research?
Response 18: The reason of Quantitative research method was used are added in Research Design and Participants as follows:
Quantitative research designs include quasi-experiments, true experiments, causal-comparative research, surveys research and experiments research. Quantitative research is likely to test theories by investigating the relationships among variables [37]. Therefore, the primary research method for this study was quantitative.

Comment 19: A discussion on the design and development of the interactive methods should be presented here.
Response 19: A discussion on the design and development of the interactive methods is included as follows:
Interactivity can also be categorized as human-system and human-human, as technologies are allowing both in a learning environment [3]. The framework for interactive learning application is developed based on these two types of interactions.

Comment 20: Participants – this study uses quasi-experimental design, the participants should be assigned into control and experimental group. This information is not available. How did you assign participants into these groups? How did you select the participants for this study?
For measurement items, what are the scales used in this study?
Please list the sources. For the self-developed items, reliability and validity tests should be conducted and reported.
Response 20: Additional information of participants is added in Research Design and Participants as follows:
One of the numerous forms of quasi-experimental design is pre- and post-test research. "Quasi" refers to something that resembles experimental study. Studies evaluating a curriculum for education, a treatment system or a simulation training commonly apply pre- and post-test evaluation [33]. Since this study is to compare students' learning experiences and academic performance before and after using the AR system, a pre- and post-test quasi-experimental research method was chosen.
Convenience sampling is a nonprobability or non-random sampling in which it is able to conveniently reach and recruit members of the target population for the study [34]. Usually, convenience samples of university students are used in academic surveys [35]. Since the respondents were students from a Malaysian university taking Calculus subject, a non-probability convenience sampling method was used for this study.

For measurement items, the scales used in this study are included in Survey Design and Procedures - Section B as follows:
All the questions for the aforementioned variables were measured through 5-point Likert scale.

For the self-developed items, reliability and validity tests were conducted and included in Internal consistent reliability, as follows:
All the self-developed questions under human-human interaction variables satisfied the reliability as the loading is >0.6 [33]. For the three self-developed questions (LE 10, LE11, and LE12) under learning experience variable two of the questions LE11, LE12 also satisfy this criterion.

Comment 21: What is the structural equation modelling (SEM)?
Why is SEM used in this research?
How to conduct the data analysis?
You should also discuss the data analysis for longitudinal study using SEM.
Response 21: Structural equation modeling (SEM) combines multiple regression and factor analysis. It is employed to examine the relationships between a group of observable variables and latent concepts.
There are two main types of the SEM. In this study, instead of using the traditional Covariance-Based-SEM (CB-SEM), Partial Least Squares-SEM (PLS-SEM). PLS-SEM is chosen to analyze the data based on its capability to handle complex models and small sample sizes.
Data analysis using PLS-SEM was employed by defining clear research objectives and hypotheses, data preparation, structural model analysis, hypotheses testing, structural model assessment and predictive accuracy, effect size and relevance evaluation [36].
PLS-SEM is often chosen for longitudinal studies due to its effectiveness in handling small sample sizes, which are common in these studies, especially when compared to cross-sectional studies [36].

Comment 22: Results
As the measurement items were adopted from many different sources, instrument reliability and validity tests using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) should be conducted and reported.
Response 22: CB-SEM and PLS-SEM are two widely accepted second generation data analysis approaches. PLS-SEM is used to analyze the data as the objective of the study is to confirm the hypotheses to explain the relationship between the exogenous and endogenous constructs for the following reasons [39]:
PLS-SEM can be applied for exploratory research—when “theory is less developed”.
PLS-SEM can handle complex cause-effect structural models.
Additionally, data characteristics, such as small sample size and non-normal data, can be some of the reasons to choose PLS-SEM.

Comment 23: For self-developed items, procedures to establish instrument reliability and validity should be presented.
Response 23: For the self-developed items, reliability and validity tests were conducted and included in Internal consistency reliability, as follows:
All the self-developed questions under human-human interaction variables satisfied the reliability as the loading is >0.6 [33]. For the three self-developed questions (LE 10, LE11, and LE12) under learning experience variable two of the questions LE11, LE12 also satisfy this criterion.

Comment 24: The result section needs to do a major revision with appropriate analyses. Please include relevant Table(s) with appropriate details such as paired t test results, significant value, etc. for each of the test conducted.
Response 24: Tables 8 to 13 are included to report the results of paired t test results, significant value and other tests conducted.

Comment 25: Discussions
The author(s) should discuss/relate/compare the findings with prior relevant studies. Please also explain how the results in this study relate to previous findings, whether in support, contradiction, or simply as added data. The discussion should be aligned with the research objectives.
Response 25: The discussion was rewritten with comparisons from previous studies and aligned with the research objectives as follows:
The study aims to develop an augmented reality application that promotes interaction and spatial visualization for learning calculus and evaluates the effect of the interactive learning system on the performance of learning. Human-human interaction is evaluated as part of the chat function of application and human-system interaction is analysed as part of augmented reality implementation through mobile application.

The first hypothesis was accepted as human-system interactivity positively affected the learning experience factor. As this study developed an augmented reality application for learning calculus, here human-system interaction is related to the interactivity promoted by the augmented reality application. Studies implementing augmented reality in improving learning experience founds that the didactic experience of this technology make students more engaged and hence providing an enriched learning experience [12, 14, 16, 21, 27]. This study has also found that among the human-system interaction all students univocally cancelled out disagreement that it provided them with real world 3D object feelings. The study using similar questionnaire have also found that it has significant impact on the learning experience in general and motivation in particular [39]. So, the result of this study is aligned with the prior relevant studies.

The second hypothesis result found that human-human interaction significantly influences learning experience. The implication from this hypothesis acceptance indicate that learning experience is shaped by human-human interaction which can comes from student-teacher or student-student. In the study design both student-teacher and student-student interaction facilities were provided via application chat function. So, it can be said that both type of human-human interactions are associated positively with learning experience. This result is in line with the findings where both types of interaction led to learning satisfaction [47]. Another study found that human-human interactivity increases learning engagement [1, 2, 3]. In addition to that another study has also claimed that learning confidence as part of learning experience has also increased through interaction with peers and teachers [1]. From the findings of these research, it can be concluded that the result of human-human interaction affecting learning experience is in line with existing research.
The third hypothesis of the study was tested by using paired sample “t-test” where learning performance’ means were compared from ‘pre-test’ to ‘post-test scenario. The result shows that there is significant relation between the score and “post-test” mean is higher than the ‘pre-test’ one. Other studies have also found that learning experience as result of human-system and human-human interactivity increase learning performance [3, 15, 47]. So, it can be claimed that in terms of hypothesis acceptance, this study is in line with existing literature.

Comment 26: Additional comments:

Page 5, figure 1. Research design - Causal not casual relationship

The development of research hypotheses is missing.

Did not justify the adopted questionnaire.

Did not specify the questions for the quiz. Are the same or different sets of questions used for pre and post? How many questions?

Did not mention if measurement model and structural model were assessed based on data collected in the first phase or the third phase?

Ensure consistency in reporting the number of decimals throughout the manuscript (including in Tables)

Response 26:

In Figure 1, Casual Relationship is changed to Causal Relationship.

The development of research hypotheses is included in Section Methods - Research Framework.

Justifications were added in Survey Design and Procedures - Section B.

Additional information for the quiz is included as follows:

The quiz included five True/False and one formative questions on solid of revolution chapter. The quiz was used in pre- and post-test evaluation for measuring learning performance factor. To avoid question biases, the same questions were used. Order of true-false questions were changed to make sure students did not just follow the similar pattern of answer from the pre-test.

5. Phase three is included in Methods - Data Analysis Techniques as follows: The structural model was analyzed based on the data collected in phase three from post-test.
6. Done consistency in reporting the number of decimals.

Comment 27: Overall:
This paper requires a significant revision to make the best of this and present the work in a clear and well-structured way, particularly on the literature review, the methodology, the research design and procedures used in this study, measurement instruments and data analysis techniques. Additionally, the discussion section is not exhaustive to provide good attempt to explain many of the study results. In fact, the discussion is not aligned with the research objectives.

Response 27: We have revised the manuscript carefully based on all the comments and issues raised.
Comment 1: In this paper, the authors introduced the interactive learning system for learning Calculus. There is a great deal of good work in this paper. However, it does require a significant overall revision to make the best of this and present the work in a clear and well-structured way, particularly on the literature review, the methodology, the research design and procedures used in this study, measurement instruments and data analysis techniques to achieve the research objectives. Additionally, the discussion section is not exhaustive to provide good attempt to explain many of the study results. In fact, the discussion is not aligned with the research objectives.
Response 1: We have revised the manuscript carefully based on all the comments and issues raised.

Comment 2: Abstract
Background – the problems of the interactive system are not clear. The authors should point out the existing problems of the interactive system in learning mathematics, particularly in learning Calculus.
Please include the main objective(s) or research question(s) of this study in this section. The research objectives/research questions are not clear.
Response 2: Existing problems of the interactive system in learning mathematics, particularly in learning Calculus are added as follows:
However, calculus learning augmented reality application has limitation in promoting a human collaboration in learning.
The main objective is included in Purpose and Introduction:
This research develops an augmented reality application that promotes interaction and spatial visualization for learning calculus and evaluates the effect of the interactive learning system on the performance of learning.

Comment 3: Introduction
This section should include the following information:
Response 3: The existing problems in learning Calculus are included Introduction – Paragraph 1, 2, 3, Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 1 & Paragraph 2; as follows:

Comment 4: What are the existing problems in learning Calculus?
Response 4:
1.       Lacking Human-Human interactivity.
Although there are some studies that have addressed the issues of student interaction with the system there is still a lack of teacher-student or student-student interaction in interactive learning systems [1, 2, 3]. Many systems have promoted a single type of interactivity [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]. Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity. Past studies in Table 2 depicts that most systems solely focused on interactivity through AR and not implementing any human-human interactivity.

2.       Lacking Spatial Visualization
Application of integration is one of the chapters in Calculus that requires spatial visualization and the 2D medium of the traditional classroom does not provide a proper solution [11, 12, 13]. After consulting with the subject teacher on what the student struggle most in learning calculus, it was suggested that students face difficulties in understanding solid of revolution through traditional classroom method as it requires 3D visualization.

Comment 5: Why “Revolution of Solids” is proposed in this research?
Response 5: The reasons of “Revolution of Solids” are included as follows:
In understanding revolution of solids around an axis, visualization of the solid in-question is very important. Spatially related 3D images cannot be drawn on a 2D board or projected over a computer. These hinder students in visualizing the solid and result in difficulties in conceptualizing the concept.

After consulting with the subject teacher on what the student struggle most in learning calculus, it was suggested that students face difficulties in understanding solid of revolution through traditional classroom method as it requires 3D visualization.

Comment 6: Why interactive approach is proposed to overcome these problems?
Response 6: The reasons of interactive approach are included as follows:
Although researchers have implemented AR to assist in visualization, they are mainly focused on human-system interaction, either through haptic or non-haptic interaction [14, 15, 16, 17]. Besides, agility is another issue that some systems could not addresses as they are desktop-based systems [17, 18, 19]. Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20]. So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners.

Comment 7: What are the existing interactive methods have been proposed to solve Mathematics problem in particular Calculus (Revolution of Solids)?
Response 7: The existing interactive methods are focused on providing content visualization and included in the Introduction as follows:

Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22]. As such, developing an interactive AR application that facilitates both human-human and human-system interactivities and assists in conceptualizing and understanding math better is needed.

Comment 8: What are the weaknesses of the existing interactive methods in solving mathematics (Calculus- Revolution of Solids) problems?
Response 8: The weaknesses of the existing interactive methods are included in Introduction – Paragraph 4 as follows:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 9: How are the proposed interactive methods (augmented reality and chat functions) able to solve the existing problem in learning Revolution of Solids?
Response 9: Introduction – Paragraph 3
So, it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners. Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interactions.
The interactive methods (augmented reality and chat functions) are proposed as follows:
1.       AR – to implement Spatial Visualization
2. Chat – to improve Human-Human interactivity.

Comment 10: Please include the main objective(s)/ research questions of this study in this section.
Response 10: Main objectives are included as follows:
This research aims to develop an interactive AR application for learning calculus that promotes human-system interaction via AR and human-human interaction through chat functions.

Comment 11: Include a brief description of the methodology and system used in this study.
Response 11: A brief description of the methodology and system used in this study are included as follows:
Pre-test and post-test data from students learning calculus in the classroom using the AR interactive learning system were gathered using a questionnaire and a quiz to evaluate the impact of the developed AR system.

Comment 12: Literature review/Background study
In this section, discussion on the following should be included:
Major problems in learning calculus (visualization)
Response 12: Discussion on the major problems in learning calculus (visualization) are included as follows:
1.       Lacking Human-Human interactivity.
2.       Lacking Spatial Visualization

Comment 13: How are the interactive activities able to solve the existing problem in learning calculus?
Response 13: Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20]. So, it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners. Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22].

Comment 14: What are the existing interactive methods proposed to overcome these problems? Should discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the existing methods.
Response 14: The existing interactive methods proposed to overcome these problems are included as:
AR based interactive book [5] is a tool used in asynchronous learning. Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity.

Advantages of the existing methods are included as:
Interactive technology has made learning more personalized and kept students engaged through various applications [23]. This paper also suggested that interactive technology can make learning more active, and intensive for students where students can communicate easily with each-others and also with the teacher [23].

Disadvantages of the existing methods are included as:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 15: What are the major issues of the existing interactive methods?
Response 15: Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22].
Past studies in Table 2 depicts that most systems solely focused on interactivity through AR and not implementing any human-human interactivity.

Comment 16: Why are AR and chat functions introduced in learning calculus?
Response 16: The interactive AR application facilitates both human-human and human-system interactivities and assists in conceptualizing and understanding math better.

Comment 17: Methodology
The author may consider sub-dividing this section as below:
i.        Study design and procedures
ii.            The design and development of the interactive methods
iii.            Participants
iv.            Measurement scales
v.             Data analysis techniques
Response 17: We have re-arranged the sub-sections with the suggested sections such as Study design and procedures, Research Framework, Survey Design and Procedures and Data Analysis Techniques in Methodology.

Comment 18: Study design and procedures – you should discuss the choice of quantitative research method in this research, what is the quasi-experimental design? Why is quasi-experimental design used in this research? What are the procedures to conduct this research?
Response 18: The reason of Quantitative research method was used are added in Research Design and Participants as follows:
Quantitative research designs include quasi-experiments, true experiments, causal-comparative research, surveys research and experiments research. Quantitative research is likely to test theories by investigating the relationships among variables [37]. Therefore, the primary research method for this study was quantitative.

Comment 19: A discussion on the design and development of the interactive methods should be presented here.
Response 19: A discussion on the design and development of the interactive methods is included as follows:
Interactivity can also be categorized as human-system and human-human, as technologies are allowing both in a learning environment [3]. The framework for interactive learning application is developed based on these two types of interactions.

Comment 20: Participants – this study uses quasi-experimental design, the participants should be assigned into control and experimental group. This information is not available. How did you assign participants into these groups? How did you select the participants for this study?
For measurement items, what are the scales used in this study?
Please list the sources. For the self-developed items, reliability and validity tests should be conducted and reported.
Response 20: Additional information of participants is added in Research Design and Participants as follows:
One of the numerous forms of quasi-experimental design is pre- and post-test research. "Quasi" refers to something that resembles experimental study. Studies evaluating a curriculum for education, a treatment system or a simulation training commonly apply pre- and post-test evaluation [33]. Since this study is to compare students' learning experiences and academic performance before and after using the AR system, a pre- and post-test quasi-experimental research method was chosen.
Convenience sampling is a nonprobability or non-random sampling in which it is able to conveniently reach and recruit members of the target population for the study [34]. Usually, convenience samples of university students are used in academic surveys [35]. Since the respondents were students from a Malaysian university taking Calculus subject, a non-probability convenience sampling method was used for this study.

For measurement items, the scales used in this study are included in Survey Design and Procedures - Section B as follows:
All the questions for the aforementioned variables were measured through 5-point Likert scale.

For the self-developed items, reliability and validity tests were conducted and included in Internal consistent reliability, as follows:
All the self-developed questions under human-human interaction variables satisfied the reliability as the loading is >0.6 [33]. For the three self-developed questions (LE 10, LE11, and LE12) under learning experience variable two of the questions LE11, LE12 also satisfy this criterion.

Comment 21: What is the structural equation modelling (SEM)?
Why is SEM used in this research?
How to conduct the data analysis?
You should also discuss the data analysis for longitudinal study using SEM.
Response 21: Structural equation modeling (SEM) combines multiple regression and factor analysis. It is employed to examine the relationships between a group of observable variables and latent concepts.
There are two main types of the SEM. In this study, instead of using the traditional Covariance-Based-SEM (CB-SEM), Partial Least Squares-SEM (PLS-SEM). PLS-SEM is chosen to analyze the data based on its capability to handle complex models and small sample sizes.
Data analysis using PLS-SEM was employed by defining clear research objectives and hypotheses, data preparation, structural model analysis, hypotheses testing, structural model assessment and predictive accuracy, effect size and relevance evaluation [36].
PLS-SEM is often chosen for longitudinal studies due to its effectiveness in handling small sample sizes, which are common in these studies, especially when compared to cross-sectional studies [36].

Comment 22: Results
As the measurement items were adopted from many different sources, instrument reliability and validity tests using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) should be conducted and reported.
Response 22: CB-SEM and PLS-SEM are two widely accepted second generation data analysis approaches. PLS-SEM is used to analyze the data as the objective of the study is to confirm the hypotheses to explain the relationship between the exogenous and endogenous constructs for the following reasons [39]:
PLS-SEM can be applied for exploratory research—when “theory is less developed”.
PLS-SEM can handle complex cause-effect structural models.
Additionally, data characteristics, such as small sample size and non-normal data, can be some of the reasons to choose PLS-SEM.

Comment 23: For self-developed items, procedures to establish instrument reliability and validity should be presented.
Response 23: For the self-developed items, reliability and validity tests were conducted and included in Internal consistency reliability, as follows:
All the self-developed questions under human-human interaction variables satisfied the reliability as the loading is >0.6 [33]. For the three self-developed questions (LE 10, LE11, and LE12) under learning experience variable two of the questions LE11, LE12 also satisfy this criterion.

Comment 24: The result section needs to do a major revision with appropriate analyses. Please include relevant Table(s) with appropriate details such as paired t test results, significant value, etc. for each of the test conducted.
Response 24: Tables 8 to 13 are included to report the results of paired t test results, significant value and other tests conducted.

Comment 25: Discussions
The author(s) should discuss/relate/compare the findings with prior relevant studies. Please also explain how the results in this study relate to previous findings, whether in support, contradiction, or simply as added data. The discussion should be aligned with the research objectives.
Response 25: The discussion was rewritten with comparisons from previous studies and aligned with the research objectives as follows:
The study aims to develop an augmented reality application that promotes interaction and spatial visualization for learning calculus and evaluates the effect of the interactive learning system on the performance of learning. Human-human interaction is evaluated as part of the chat function of application and human-system interaction is analysed as part of augmented reality implementation through mobile application.

The first hypothesis was accepted as human-system interactivity positively affected the learning experience factor. As this study developed an augmented reality application for learning calculus, here human-system interaction is related to the interactivity promoted by the augmented reality application. Studies implementing augmented reality in improving learning experience founds that the didactic experience of this technology make students more engaged and hence providing an enriched learning experience [12, 14, 16, 21, 27]. This study has also found that among the human-system interaction all students univocally cancelled out disagreement that it provided them with real world 3D object feelings. The study using similar questionnaire have also found that it has significant impact on the learning experience in general and motivation in particular [39]. So, the result of this study is aligned with the prior relevant studies.

The second hypothesis result found that human-human interaction significantly influences learning experience. The implication from this hypothesis acceptance indicate that learning experience is shaped by human-human interaction which can comes from student-teacher or student-student. In the study design both student-teacher and student-student interaction facilities were provided via application chat function. So, it can be said that both type of human-human interactions are associated positively with learning experience. This result is in line with the findings where both types of interaction led to learning satisfaction [47]. Another study found that human-human interactivity increases learning engagement [1, 2, 3]. In addition to that another study has also claimed that learning confidence as part of learning experience has also increased through interaction with peers and teachers [1]. From the findings of these research, it can be concluded that the result of human-human interaction affecting learning experience is in line with existing research.
The third hypothesis of the study was tested by using paired sample “t-test” where learning performance’ means were compared from ‘pre-test’ to ‘post-test scenario. The result shows that there is significant relation between the score and “post-test” mean is higher than the ‘pre-test’ one. Other studies have also found that learning experience as result of human-system and human-human interactivity increase learning performance [3, 15, 47]. So, it can be claimed that in terms of hypothesis acceptance, this study is in line with existing literature.

Comment 26: Additional comments:

Page 5, figure 1. Research design - Causal not casual relationship

The development of research hypotheses is missing.

Did not justify the adopted questionnaire.

Did not specify the questions for the quiz. Are the same or different sets of questions used for pre and post? How many questions?

Did not mention if measurement model and structural model were assessed based on data collected in the first phase or the third phase?

Ensure consistency in reporting the number of decimals throughout the manuscript (including in Tables)

Response 26:

In Figure 1, Casual Relationship is changed to Causal Relationship.

The development of research hypotheses is included in Section Methods - Research Framework.

Justifications were added in Survey Design and Procedures - Section B.

Additional information for the quiz is included as follows:

The quiz included five True/False and one formative questions on solid of revolution chapter. The quiz was used in pre- and post-test evaluation for measuring learning performance factor. To avoid question biases, the same questions were used. Order of true-false questions were changed to make sure students did not just follow the similar pattern of answer from the pre-test.

5. Phase three is included in Methods - Data Analysis Techniques as follows: The structural model was analyzed based on the data collected in phase three from post-test.
6. Done consistency in reporting the number of decimals.

Comment 27: Overall:
This paper requires a significant revision to make the best of this and present the work in a clear and well-structured way, particularly on the literature review, the methodology, the research design and procedures used in this study, measurement instruments and data analysis techniques. Additionally, the discussion section is not exhaustive to provide good attempt to explain many of the study results. In fact, the discussion is not aligned with the research objectives.

Response 27: We have revised the manuscript carefully based on all the comments and issues raised.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 13 Apr 2024

Sook Ling Lew, Faculty of Information Science and Technology, Multimedia University, Ayer Keroh, 75450, Malaysia

13 Apr 2024

Author Response
Comment 1: In this paper, the authors introduced the interactive learning system for learning Calculus. There is a great deal of good work in this paper. However, it does require ... Continue reading
Comment 1: In this paper, the authors introduced the interactive learning system for learning Calculus. There is a great deal of good work in this paper. However, it does require a significant overall revision to make the best of this and present the work in a clear and well-structured way, particularly on the literature review, the methodology, the research design and procedures used in this study, measurement instruments and data analysis techniques to achieve the research objectives. Additionally, the discussion section is not exhaustive to provide good attempt to explain many of the study results. In fact, the discussion is not aligned with the research objectives.
Response 1: We have revised the manuscript carefully based on all the comments and issues raised.

Comment 2: Abstract
Background – the problems of the interactive system are not clear. The authors should point out the existing problems of the interactive system in learning mathematics, particularly in learning Calculus.
Please include the main objective(s) or research question(s) of this study in this section. The research objectives/research questions are not clear.
Response 2: Existing problems of the interactive system in learning mathematics, particularly in learning Calculus are added as follows:
However, calculus learning augmented reality application has limitation in promoting a human collaboration in learning.
The main objective is included in Purpose and Introduction:
This research develops an augmented reality application that promotes interaction and spatial visualization for learning calculus and evaluates the effect of the interactive learning system on the performance of learning.

Comment 3: Introduction
This section should include the following information:
Response 3: The existing problems in learning Calculus are included Introduction – Paragraph 1, 2, 3, Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 1 & Paragraph 2; as follows:

Comment 4: What are the existing problems in learning Calculus?
Response 4:
1.       Lacking Human-Human interactivity.
Although there are some studies that have addressed the issues of student interaction with the system there is still a lack of teacher-student or student-student interaction in interactive learning systems [1, 2, 3]. Many systems have promoted a single type of interactivity [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]. Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity. Past studies in Table 2 depicts that most systems solely focused on interactivity through AR and not implementing any human-human interactivity.

2.       Lacking Spatial Visualization
Application of integration is one of the chapters in Calculus that requires spatial visualization and the 2D medium of the traditional classroom does not provide a proper solution [11, 12, 13]. After consulting with the subject teacher on what the student struggle most in learning calculus, it was suggested that students face difficulties in understanding solid of revolution through traditional classroom method as it requires 3D visualization.

Comment 5: Why “Revolution of Solids” is proposed in this research?
Response 5: The reasons of “Revolution of Solids” are included as follows:
In understanding revolution of solids around an axis, visualization of the solid in-question is very important. Spatially related 3D images cannot be drawn on a 2D board or projected over a computer. These hinder students in visualizing the solid and result in difficulties in conceptualizing the concept.

After consulting with the subject teacher on what the student struggle most in learning calculus, it was suggested that students face difficulties in understanding solid of revolution through traditional classroom method as it requires 3D visualization.

Comment 6: Why interactive approach is proposed to overcome these problems?
Response 6: The reasons of interactive approach are included as follows:
Although researchers have implemented AR to assist in visualization, they are mainly focused on human-system interaction, either through haptic or non-haptic interaction [14, 15, 16, 17]. Besides, agility is another issue that some systems could not addresses as they are desktop-based systems [17, 18, 19]. Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20]. So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners.

Comment 7: What are the existing interactive methods have been proposed to solve Mathematics problem in particular Calculus (Revolution of Solids)?
Response 7: The existing interactive methods are focused on providing content visualization and included in the Introduction as follows:

Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22]. As such, developing an interactive AR application that facilitates both human-human and human-system interactivities and assists in conceptualizing and understanding math better is needed.

Comment 8: What are the weaknesses of the existing interactive methods in solving mathematics (Calculus- Revolution of Solids) problems?
Response 8: The weaknesses of the existing interactive methods are included in Introduction – Paragraph 4 as follows:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 9: How are the proposed interactive methods (augmented reality and chat functions) able to solve the existing problem in learning Revolution of Solids?
Response 9: Introduction – Paragraph 3
So, it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners. Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interactions.
The interactive methods (augmented reality and chat functions) are proposed as follows:
1.       AR – to implement Spatial Visualization
2. Chat – to improve Human-Human interactivity.

Comment 10: Please include the main objective(s)/ research questions of this study in this section.
Response 10: Main objectives are included as follows:
This research aims to develop an interactive AR application for learning calculus that promotes human-system interaction via AR and human-human interaction through chat functions.

Comment 11: Include a brief description of the methodology and system used in this study.
Response 11: A brief description of the methodology and system used in this study are included as follows:
Pre-test and post-test data from students learning calculus in the classroom using the AR interactive learning system were gathered using a questionnaire and a quiz to evaluate the impact of the developed AR system.

Comment 12: Literature review/Background study
In this section, discussion on the following should be included:
Major problems in learning calculus (visualization)
Response 12: Discussion on the major problems in learning calculus (visualization) are included as follows:
1.       Lacking Human-Human interactivity.
2.       Lacking Spatial Visualization

Comment 13: How are the interactive activities able to solve the existing problem in learning calculus?
Response 13: Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20]. So, it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners. Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22].

Comment 14: What are the existing interactive methods proposed to overcome these problems? Should discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the existing methods.
Response 14: The existing interactive methods proposed to overcome these problems are included as:
AR based interactive book [5] is a tool used in asynchronous learning. Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity.

Advantages of the existing methods are included as:
Interactive technology has made learning more personalized and kept students engaged through various applications [23]. This paper also suggested that interactive technology can make learning more active, and intensive for students where students can communicate easily with each-others and also with the teacher [23].

Disadvantages of the existing methods are included as:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 15: What are the major issues of the existing interactive methods?
Response 15: Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22].
Past studies in Table 2 depicts that most systems solely focused on interactivity through AR and not implementing any human-human interactivity.

Comment 16: Why are AR and chat functions introduced in learning calculus?
Response 16: The interactive AR application facilitates both human-human and human-system interactivities and assists in conceptualizing and understanding math better.

Comment 17: Methodology
The author may consider sub-dividing this section as below:
i.        Study design and procedures
ii.            The design and development of the interactive methods
iii.            Participants
iv.            Measurement scales
v.             Data analysis techniques
Response 17: We have re-arranged the sub-sections with the suggested sections such as Study design and procedures, Research Framework, Survey Design and Procedures and Data Analysis Techniques in Methodology.

Comment 18: Study design and procedures – you should discuss the choice of quantitative research method in this research, what is the quasi-experimental design? Why is quasi-experimental design used in this research? What are the procedures to conduct this research?
Response 18: The reason of Quantitative research method was used are added in Research Design and Participants as follows:
Quantitative research designs include quasi-experiments, true experiments, causal-comparative research, surveys research and experiments research. Quantitative research is likely to test theories by investigating the relationships among variables [37]. Therefore, the primary research method for this study was quantitative.

Comment 19: A discussion on the design and development of the interactive methods should be presented here.
Response 19: A discussion on the design and development of the interactive methods is included as follows:
Interactivity can also be categorized as human-system and human-human, as technologies are allowing both in a learning environment [3]. The framework for interactive learning application is developed based on these two types of interactions.

Comment 20: Participants – this study uses quasi-experimental design, the participants should be assigned into control and experimental group. This information is not available. How did you assign participants into these groups? How did you select the participants for this study?
For measurement items, what are the scales used in this study?
Please list the sources. For the self-developed items, reliability and validity tests should be conducted and reported.
Response 20: Additional information of participants is added in Research Design and Participants as follows:
One of the numerous forms of quasi-experimental design is pre- and post-test research. "Quasi" refers to something that resembles experimental study. Studies evaluating a curriculum for education, a treatment system or a simulation training commonly apply pre- and post-test evaluation [33]. Since this study is to compare students' learning experiences and academic performance before and after using the AR system, a pre- and post-test quasi-experimental research method was chosen.
Convenience sampling is a nonprobability or non-random sampling in which it is able to conveniently reach and recruit members of the target population for the study [34]. Usually, convenience samples of university students are used in academic surveys [35]. Since the respondents were students from a Malaysian university taking Calculus subject, a non-probability convenience sampling method was used for this study.

For measurement items, the scales used in this study are included in Survey Design and Procedures - Section B as follows:
All the questions for the aforementioned variables were measured through 5-point Likert scale.

For the self-developed items, reliability and validity tests were conducted and included in Internal consistent reliability, as follows:
All the self-developed questions under human-human interaction variables satisfied the reliability as the loading is >0.6 [33]. For the three self-developed questions (LE 10, LE11, and LE12) under learning experience variable two of the questions LE11, LE12 also satisfy this criterion.

Comment 21: What is the structural equation modelling (SEM)?
Why is SEM used in this research?
How to conduct the data analysis?
You should also discuss the data analysis for longitudinal study using SEM.
Response 21: Structural equation modeling (SEM) combines multiple regression and factor analysis. It is employed to examine the relationships between a group of observable variables and latent concepts.
There are two main types of the SEM. In this study, instead of using the traditional Covariance-Based-SEM (CB-SEM), Partial Least Squares-SEM (PLS-SEM). PLS-SEM is chosen to analyze the data based on its capability to handle complex models and small sample sizes.
Data analysis using PLS-SEM was employed by defining clear research objectives and hypotheses, data preparation, structural model analysis, hypotheses testing, structural model assessment and predictive accuracy, effect size and relevance evaluation [36].
PLS-SEM is often chosen for longitudinal studies due to its effectiveness in handling small sample sizes, which are common in these studies, especially when compared to cross-sectional studies [36].

Comment 22: Results
As the measurement items were adopted from many different sources, instrument reliability and validity tests using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) should be conducted and reported.
Response 22: CB-SEM and PLS-SEM are two widely accepted second generation data analysis approaches. PLS-SEM is used to analyze the data as the objective of the study is to confirm the hypotheses to explain the relationship between the exogenous and endogenous constructs for the following reasons [39]:
PLS-SEM can be applied for exploratory research—when “theory is less developed”.
PLS-SEM can handle complex cause-effect structural models.
Additionally, data characteristics, such as small sample size and non-normal data, can be some of the reasons to choose PLS-SEM.

Comment 23: For self-developed items, procedures to establish instrument reliability and validity should be presented.
Response 23: For the self-developed items, reliability and validity tests were conducted and included in Internal consistency reliability, as follows:
All the self-developed questions under human-human interaction variables satisfied the reliability as the loading is >0.6 [33]. For the three self-developed questions (LE 10, LE11, and LE12) under learning experience variable two of the questions LE11, LE12 also satisfy this criterion.

Comment 24: The result section needs to do a major revision with appropriate analyses. Please include relevant Table(s) with appropriate details such as paired t test results, significant value, etc. for each of the test conducted.
Response 24: Tables 8 to 13 are included to report the results of paired t test results, significant value and other tests conducted.

Comment 25: Discussions
The author(s) should discuss/relate/compare the findings with prior relevant studies. Please also explain how the results in this study relate to previous findings, whether in support, contradiction, or simply as added data. The discussion should be aligned with the research objectives.
Response 25: The discussion was rewritten with comparisons from previous studies and aligned with the research objectives as follows:
The study aims to develop an augmented reality application that promotes interaction and spatial visualization for learning calculus and evaluates the effect of the interactive learning system on the performance of learning. Human-human interaction is evaluated as part of the chat function of application and human-system interaction is analysed as part of augmented reality implementation through mobile application.

The first hypothesis was accepted as human-system interactivity positively affected the learning experience factor. As this study developed an augmented reality application for learning calculus, here human-system interaction is related to the interactivity promoted by the augmented reality application. Studies implementing augmented reality in improving learning experience founds that the didactic experience of this technology make students more engaged and hence providing an enriched learning experience [12, 14, 16, 21, 27]. This study has also found that among the human-system interaction all students univocally cancelled out disagreement that it provided them with real world 3D object feelings. The study using similar questionnaire have also found that it has significant impact on the learning experience in general and motivation in particular [39]. So, the result of this study is aligned with the prior relevant studies.

The second hypothesis result found that human-human interaction significantly influences learning experience. The implication from this hypothesis acceptance indicate that learning experience is shaped by human-human interaction which can comes from student-teacher or student-student. In the study design both student-teacher and student-student interaction facilities were provided via application chat function. So, it can be said that both type of human-human interactions are associated positively with learning experience. This result is in line with the findings where both types of interaction led to learning satisfaction [47]. Another study found that human-human interactivity increases learning engagement [1, 2, 3]. In addition to that another study has also claimed that learning confidence as part of learning experience has also increased through interaction with peers and teachers [1]. From the findings of these research, it can be concluded that the result of human-human interaction affecting learning experience is in line with existing research.
The third hypothesis of the study was tested by using paired sample “t-test” where learning performance’ means were compared from ‘pre-test’ to ‘post-test scenario. The result shows that there is significant relation between the score and “post-test” mean is higher than the ‘pre-test’ one. Other studies have also found that learning experience as result of human-system and human-human interactivity increase learning performance [3, 15, 47]. So, it can be claimed that in terms of hypothesis acceptance, this study is in line with existing literature.

Comment 26: Additional comments:

Page 5, figure 1. Research design - Causal not casual relationship

The development of research hypotheses is missing.

Did not justify the adopted questionnaire.

Did not specify the questions for the quiz. Are the same or different sets of questions used for pre and post? How many questions?

Did not mention if measurement model and structural model were assessed based on data collected in the first phase or the third phase?

Ensure consistency in reporting the number of decimals throughout the manuscript (including in Tables)

Response 26:

In Figure 1, Casual Relationship is changed to Causal Relationship.

The development of research hypotheses is included in Section Methods - Research Framework.

Justifications were added in Survey Design and Procedures - Section B.

Additional information for the quiz is included as follows:

The quiz included five True/False and one formative questions on solid of revolution chapter. The quiz was used in pre- and post-test evaluation for measuring learning performance factor. To avoid question biases, the same questions were used. Order of true-false questions were changed to make sure students did not just follow the similar pattern of answer from the pre-test.

5. Phase three is included in Methods - Data Analysis Techniques as follows: The structural model was analyzed based on the data collected in phase three from post-test.
6. Done consistency in reporting the number of decimals.

Comment 27: Overall:
This paper requires a significant revision to make the best of this and present the work in a clear and well-structured way, particularly on the literature review, the methodology, the research design and procedures used in this study, measurement instruments and data analysis techniques. Additionally, the discussion section is not exhaustive to provide good attempt to explain many of the study results. In fact, the discussion is not aligned with the research objectives.

Response 27: We have revised the manuscript carefully based on all the comments and issues raised.
Comment 1: In this paper, the authors introduced the interactive learning system for learning Calculus. There is a great deal of good work in this paper. However, it does require a significant overall revision to make the best of this and present the work in a clear and well-structured way, particularly on the literature review, the methodology, the research design and procedures used in this study, measurement instruments and data analysis techniques to achieve the research objectives. Additionally, the discussion section is not exhaustive to provide good attempt to explain many of the study results. In fact, the discussion is not aligned with the research objectives.
Response 1: We have revised the manuscript carefully based on all the comments and issues raised.

Comment 2: Abstract
Background – the problems of the interactive system are not clear. The authors should point out the existing problems of the interactive system in learning mathematics, particularly in learning Calculus.
Please include the main objective(s) or research question(s) of this study in this section. The research objectives/research questions are not clear.
Response 2: Existing problems of the interactive system in learning mathematics, particularly in learning Calculus are added as follows:
However, calculus learning augmented reality application has limitation in promoting a human collaboration in learning.
The main objective is included in Purpose and Introduction:
This research develops an augmented reality application that promotes interaction and spatial visualization for learning calculus and evaluates the effect of the interactive learning system on the performance of learning.

Comment 3: Introduction
This section should include the following information:
Response 3: The existing problems in learning Calculus are included Introduction – Paragraph 1, 2, 3, Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 1 & Paragraph 2; as follows:

Comment 4: What are the existing problems in learning Calculus?
Response 4:
1.       Lacking Human-Human interactivity.
Although there are some studies that have addressed the issues of student interaction with the system there is still a lack of teacher-student or student-student interaction in interactive learning systems [1, 2, 3]. Many systems have promoted a single type of interactivity [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]. Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity. Past studies in Table 2 depicts that most systems solely focused on interactivity through AR and not implementing any human-human interactivity.

2.       Lacking Spatial Visualization
Application of integration is one of the chapters in Calculus that requires spatial visualization and the 2D medium of the traditional classroom does not provide a proper solution [11, 12, 13]. After consulting with the subject teacher on what the student struggle most in learning calculus, it was suggested that students face difficulties in understanding solid of revolution through traditional classroom method as it requires 3D visualization.

Comment 5: Why “Revolution of Solids” is proposed in this research?
Response 5: The reasons of “Revolution of Solids” are included as follows:
In understanding revolution of solids around an axis, visualization of the solid in-question is very important. Spatially related 3D images cannot be drawn on a 2D board or projected over a computer. These hinder students in visualizing the solid and result in difficulties in conceptualizing the concept.

After consulting with the subject teacher on what the student struggle most in learning calculus, it was suggested that students face difficulties in understanding solid of revolution through traditional classroom method as it requires 3D visualization.

Comment 6: Why interactive approach is proposed to overcome these problems?
Response 6: The reasons of interactive approach are included as follows:
Although researchers have implemented AR to assist in visualization, they are mainly focused on human-system interaction, either through haptic or non-haptic interaction [14, 15, 16, 17]. Besides, agility is another issue that some systems could not addresses as they are desktop-based systems [17, 18, 19]. Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20]. So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners.

Comment 7: What are the existing interactive methods have been proposed to solve Mathematics problem in particular Calculus (Revolution of Solids)?
Response 7: The existing interactive methods are focused on providing content visualization and included in the Introduction as follows:

Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22]. As such, developing an interactive AR application that facilitates both human-human and human-system interactivities and assists in conceptualizing and understanding math better is needed.

Comment 8: What are the weaknesses of the existing interactive methods in solving mathematics (Calculus- Revolution of Solids) problems?
Response 8: The weaknesses of the existing interactive methods are included in Introduction – Paragraph 4 as follows:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 9: How are the proposed interactive methods (augmented reality and chat functions) able to solve the existing problem in learning Revolution of Solids?
Response 9: Introduction – Paragraph 3
So, it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners. Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interactions.
The interactive methods (augmented reality and chat functions) are proposed as follows:
1.       AR – to implement Spatial Visualization
2. Chat – to improve Human-Human interactivity.

Comment 10: Please include the main objective(s)/ research questions of this study in this section.
Response 10: Main objectives are included as follows:
This research aims to develop an interactive AR application for learning calculus that promotes human-system interaction via AR and human-human interaction through chat functions.

Comment 11: Include a brief description of the methodology and system used in this study.
Response 11: A brief description of the methodology and system used in this study are included as follows:
Pre-test and post-test data from students learning calculus in the classroom using the AR interactive learning system were gathered using a questionnaire and a quiz to evaluate the impact of the developed AR system.

Comment 12: Literature review/Background study
In this section, discussion on the following should be included:
Major problems in learning calculus (visualization)
Response 12: Discussion on the major problems in learning calculus (visualization) are included as follows:
1.       Lacking Human-Human interactivity.
2.       Lacking Spatial Visualization

Comment 13: How are the interactive activities able to solve the existing problem in learning calculus?
Response 13: Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20]. So, it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners. Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22].

Comment 14: What are the existing interactive methods proposed to overcome these problems? Should discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the existing methods.
Response 14: The existing interactive methods proposed to overcome these problems are included as:
AR based interactive book [5] is a tool used in asynchronous learning. Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity.

Advantages of the existing methods are included as:
Interactive technology has made learning more personalized and kept students engaged through various applications [23]. This paper also suggested that interactive technology can make learning more active, and intensive for students where students can communicate easily with each-others and also with the teacher [23].

Disadvantages of the existing methods are included as:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 15: What are the major issues of the existing interactive methods?
Response 15: Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22].
Past studies in Table 2 depicts that most systems solely focused on interactivity through AR and not implementing any human-human interactivity.

Comment 16: Why are AR and chat functions introduced in learning calculus?
Response 16: The interactive AR application facilitates both human-human and human-system interactivities and assists in conceptualizing and understanding math better.

Comment 17: Methodology
The author may consider sub-dividing this section as below:
i.        Study design and procedures
ii.            The design and development of the interactive methods
iii.            Participants
iv.            Measurement scales
v.             Data analysis techniques
Response 17: We have re-arranged the sub-sections with the suggested sections such as Study design and procedures, Research Framework, Survey Design and Procedures and Data Analysis Techniques in Methodology.

Comment 18: Study design and procedures – you should discuss the choice of quantitative research method in this research, what is the quasi-experimental design? Why is quasi-experimental design used in this research? What are the procedures to conduct this research?
Response 18: The reason of Quantitative research method was used are added in Research Design and Participants as follows:
Quantitative research designs include quasi-experiments, true experiments, causal-comparative research, surveys research and experiments research. Quantitative research is likely to test theories by investigating the relationships among variables [37]. Therefore, the primary research method for this study was quantitative.

Comment 19: A discussion on the design and development of the interactive methods should be presented here.
Response 19: A discussion on the design and development of the interactive methods is included as follows:
Interactivity can also be categorized as human-system and human-human, as technologies are allowing both in a learning environment [3]. The framework for interactive learning application is developed based on these two types of interactions.

Comment 20: Participants – this study uses quasi-experimental design, the participants should be assigned into control and experimental group. This information is not available. How did you assign participants into these groups? How did you select the participants for this study?
For measurement items, what are the scales used in this study?
Please list the sources. For the self-developed items, reliability and validity tests should be conducted and reported.
Response 20: Additional information of participants is added in Research Design and Participants as follows:
One of the numerous forms of quasi-experimental design is pre- and post-test research. "Quasi" refers to something that resembles experimental study. Studies evaluating a curriculum for education, a treatment system or a simulation training commonly apply pre- and post-test evaluation [33]. Since this study is to compare students' learning experiences and academic performance before and after using the AR system, a pre- and post-test quasi-experimental research method was chosen.
Convenience sampling is a nonprobability or non-random sampling in which it is able to conveniently reach and recruit members of the target population for the study [34]. Usually, convenience samples of university students are used in academic surveys [35]. Since the respondents were students from a Malaysian university taking Calculus subject, a non-probability convenience sampling method was used for this study.

For measurement items, the scales used in this study are included in Survey Design and Procedures - Section B as follows:
All the questions for the aforementioned variables were measured through 5-point Likert scale.

For the self-developed items, reliability and validity tests were conducted and included in Internal consistent reliability, as follows:
All the self-developed questions under human-human interaction variables satisfied the reliability as the loading is >0.6 [33]. For the three self-developed questions (LE 10, LE11, and LE12) under learning experience variable two of the questions LE11, LE12 also satisfy this criterion.

Comment 21: What is the structural equation modelling (SEM)?
Why is SEM used in this research?
How to conduct the data analysis?
You should also discuss the data analysis for longitudinal study using SEM.
Response 21: Structural equation modeling (SEM) combines multiple regression and factor analysis. It is employed to examine the relationships between a group of observable variables and latent concepts.
There are two main types of the SEM. In this study, instead of using the traditional Covariance-Based-SEM (CB-SEM), Partial Least Squares-SEM (PLS-SEM). PLS-SEM is chosen to analyze the data based on its capability to handle complex models and small sample sizes.
Data analysis using PLS-SEM was employed by defining clear research objectives and hypotheses, data preparation, structural model analysis, hypotheses testing, structural model assessment and predictive accuracy, effect size and relevance evaluation [36].
PLS-SEM is often chosen for longitudinal studies due to its effectiveness in handling small sample sizes, which are common in these studies, especially when compared to cross-sectional studies [36].

Comment 22: Results
As the measurement items were adopted from many different sources, instrument reliability and validity tests using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) should be conducted and reported.
Response 22: CB-SEM and PLS-SEM are two widely accepted second generation data analysis approaches. PLS-SEM is used to analyze the data as the objective of the study is to confirm the hypotheses to explain the relationship between the exogenous and endogenous constructs for the following reasons [39]:
PLS-SEM can be applied for exploratory research—when “theory is less developed”.
PLS-SEM can handle complex cause-effect structural models.
Additionally, data characteristics, such as small sample size and non-normal data, can be some of the reasons to choose PLS-SEM.

Comment 23: For self-developed items, procedures to establish instrument reliability and validity should be presented.
Response 23: For the self-developed items, reliability and validity tests were conducted and included in Internal consistency reliability, as follows:
All the self-developed questions under human-human interaction variables satisfied the reliability as the loading is >0.6 [33]. For the three self-developed questions (LE 10, LE11, and LE12) under learning experience variable two of the questions LE11, LE12 also satisfy this criterion.

Comment 24: The result section needs to do a major revision with appropriate analyses. Please include relevant Table(s) with appropriate details such as paired t test results, significant value, etc. for each of the test conducted.
Response 24: Tables 8 to 13 are included to report the results of paired t test results, significant value and other tests conducted.

Comment 25: Discussions
The author(s) should discuss/relate/compare the findings with prior relevant studies. Please also explain how the results in this study relate to previous findings, whether in support, contradiction, or simply as added data. The discussion should be aligned with the research objectives.
Response 25: The discussion was rewritten with comparisons from previous studies and aligned with the research objectives as follows:
The study aims to develop an augmented reality application that promotes interaction and spatial visualization for learning calculus and evaluates the effect of the interactive learning system on the performance of learning. Human-human interaction is evaluated as part of the chat function of application and human-system interaction is analysed as part of augmented reality implementation through mobile application.

The first hypothesis was accepted as human-system interactivity positively affected the learning experience factor. As this study developed an augmented reality application for learning calculus, here human-system interaction is related to the interactivity promoted by the augmented reality application. Studies implementing augmented reality in improving learning experience founds that the didactic experience of this technology make students more engaged and hence providing an enriched learning experience [12, 14, 16, 21, 27]. This study has also found that among the human-system interaction all students univocally cancelled out disagreement that it provided them with real world 3D object feelings. The study using similar questionnaire have also found that it has significant impact on the learning experience in general and motivation in particular [39]. So, the result of this study is aligned with the prior relevant studies.

The second hypothesis result found that human-human interaction significantly influences learning experience. The implication from this hypothesis acceptance indicate that learning experience is shaped by human-human interaction which can comes from student-teacher or student-student. In the study design both student-teacher and student-student interaction facilities were provided via application chat function. So, it can be said that both type of human-human interactions are associated positively with learning experience. This result is in line with the findings where both types of interaction led to learning satisfaction [47]. Another study found that human-human interactivity increases learning engagement [1, 2, 3]. In addition to that another study has also claimed that learning confidence as part of learning experience has also increased through interaction with peers and teachers [1]. From the findings of these research, it can be concluded that the result of human-human interaction affecting learning experience is in line with existing research.
The third hypothesis of the study was tested by using paired sample “t-test” where learning performance’ means were compared from ‘pre-test’ to ‘post-test scenario. The result shows that there is significant relation between the score and “post-test” mean is higher than the ‘pre-test’ one. Other studies have also found that learning experience as result of human-system and human-human interactivity increase learning performance [3, 15, 47]. So, it can be claimed that in terms of hypothesis acceptance, this study is in line with existing literature.

Comment 26: Additional comments:

Page 5, figure 1. Research design - Causal not casual relationship

The development of research hypotheses is missing.

Did not justify the adopted questionnaire.

Did not specify the questions for the quiz. Are the same or different sets of questions used for pre and post? How many questions?

Did not mention if measurement model and structural model were assessed based on data collected in the first phase or the third phase?

Ensure consistency in reporting the number of decimals throughout the manuscript (including in Tables)

Response 26:

In Figure 1, Casual Relationship is changed to Causal Relationship.

The development of research hypotheses is included in Section Methods - Research Framework.

Justifications were added in Survey Design and Procedures - Section B.

Additional information for the quiz is included as follows:

The quiz included five True/False and one formative questions on solid of revolution chapter. The quiz was used in pre- and post-test evaluation for measuring learning performance factor. To avoid question biases, the same questions were used. Order of true-false questions were changed to make sure students did not just follow the similar pattern of answer from the pre-test.

5. Phase three is included in Methods - Data Analysis Techniques as follows: The structural model was analyzed based on the data collected in phase three from post-test.
6. Done consistency in reporting the number of decimals.

Comment 27: Overall:
This paper requires a significant revision to make the best of this and present the work in a clear and well-structured way, particularly on the literature review, the methodology, the research design and procedures used in this study, measurement instruments and data analysis techniques. Additionally, the discussion section is not exhaustive to provide good attempt to explain many of the study results. In fact, the discussion is not aligned with the research objectives.

Response 27: We have revised the manuscript carefully based on all the comments and issues raised.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2

VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 14 Mar 2022

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

	Invited Reviewers
	1	2	3
Version 2 (revision) 11 Mar 24	read		read
Version 1 14 Mar 22	read	read

Yong Wee Sek, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia, Melaka, Malaysia
Affandy Affandy, Dian Nuswantoro University, Semarang, Indonesia
Lukman Hakim Muhaimin, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia

Comments on this article

All Comments(0)

Add a comment

Browse by related subjects

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

9 Views

17 May 2024 | for Version 2

Lukman Hakim Muhaimin, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia

9 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved With Reservations

The study design, methodology, data interpretation, and conclusion sections are appropriate and effectively convey the research intent. I understand the researcher focuses here on discussing interactive media, with implicit reference to AR in the title. However, I suggest adding a discussion on the theories related to AR and linking them with interactive learning within the theoretical framework section. Furthermore, I recommend including a brief depiction of the interactive media (such as displaying images) to enhance the readers' visualization.

Lastly, I'd like to inquire: If these media were removed from the process of understanding calculus concepts, would students still be able to grasp those concepts? I hope the media developed by the researcher serves as an extended cognition, not merely a teaching aid that, if removed, would leave students unable to understand mathematical concepts.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

I cannot comment. A qualified statistician is required.
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Yes

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

mathematics education, ICT

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

5 Views

11 Apr 2024 | for Version 2

Yong Wee Sek, Fakulti Teknologi Maklumat dan Komunikasi, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia, Melaka, Malaysia

5 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved

The authors have addressed all comments and provide justifications for each section of the journal. However, the discussion section can be further improved. The quality of this paper can be further enhanced by providing explanations of the results in the discussion section. for example, for the third hypothesis, explain why this phenomena happen.

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

My research interest is in educational technologies, technology acceptance and information system

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

16 Views

12 Apr 2022 | for Version 1

Affandy Affandy, Faculty of Computer Science, Dian Nuswantoro University, Semarang, Indonesia

16 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved With Reservations

What problems are still encountered in the application of learning media based on 3D visualization with AR technology?
What systems currently exist to support learning calculus using AR and what are their weaknesses?
What are the existing systems that support visualization and interaction and what are the problems with these systems?

Literature study:

The paper needs to include an explanation of the following points to add clarity to the problem and state-of-the-art research on learning using visualization:

Utilization of AR technology in calculus learning.
Various interaction models exist in learning applications and their advantages and disadvantages.
Why visualization systems must be supported by human-human interaction in learning applications?
What prevents current AR applications from providing student-student and teacher-student interaction?

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

I cannot comment. A qualified statistician is required.
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

My research interest is in software engineering education, software visualization, and project management.

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

13 Apr 2024

Sook Ling Lew, Faculty of Information Science and Technology, Multimedia University, Ayer Keroh, 75450, Malaysia

Comment 1: This research explores the benefits of human interaction in interactive learning systems with visualization through augmented reality. The subject exposed is calculus on the topic "Revolution of Solids". The research compares the impact of human-system interaction support with human-human interaction support on student learning experiences.
In this paper, the author presents information that is quite valuable, however, several important things need to be detailed to get a more comprehensive point of view.
Response 1: We have revised the manuscript carefully based on all the comments and issues raised.

Comment 2: Introduction:
In this section, explanations related to the following things need to be explained to construct a more complete research motivation:
What problems are still encountered in the application of learning media based on 3D visualization with AR technology?
Response 2: The problems are included as follows:
(1) Lacking Human-Human interactivity.
Introduction – Paragraph 1:
Although there are some studies that have addressed the issues of student interaction with the system there is still a lack of teacher-student or student-student interaction in interactive learning systems [1, 2, 3]. Many systems have promoted a single type of interactivity [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10].
Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 1:
Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity.
Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 2:
Past studies in Table 2 depicts that most systems solely focused on interactivity through AR and not implementing any human-human interactivity.
(2) Lacking Spatial Visualization
Introduction – Paragraph 2:
Application of integration is one of the chapters in Calculus that requires spatial visualization and the 2D medium of the traditional classroom does not provide a proper solution [11, 12, 13].
Introduction – Paragraph 3:
After consulting with the subject teacher on what the student struggle most in learning calculus, it was suggested that students face difficulties in understanding solid of revolution through traditional classroom method as it requires 3D visualization.

Comment 3: What systems currently exist to support learning calculus using AR and what are their weaknesses?
Response 3: Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 1:
The existing interactive methods proposed to overcome these problems are included as:
AR based interactive book [5] is a tool used in asynchronous learning. Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity.

Introduction – Paragraph 4:
Advantages of the existing methods are included as:
Interactive technology has made learning more personalized and kept students engaged through various applications [23]. This paper also suggested that interactive technology can make learning more active, and intensive for students where students can communicate easily with each-others and also with the teacher [23].

Disadvantages of the existing methods are included as:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 4: What are the existing systems that support visualization and interaction and what are the problems with these systems?
Response 4: Introduction – Paragraph 3:
Although researchers have implemented AR to assist in visualization, they are mainly focused on human-system interaction, either through haptic or non-haptic interaction [14, 15, 16, 17]. Besides, agility is another issue that some systems could not addresses as they are desktop-based systems [17, 18, 19]. Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20]. So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners.

Comment 5: Literature study:
The paper needs to include an explanation of the following points to add clarity to the problem and state-of-the-art research on learning using visualization:
Utilization of AR technology in calculus learning.
Response 5: Advantages of the existing methods are included as:
Interactive technology has made learning more personalized and kept students engaged through various applications [23]. This paper also suggested that interactive technology can make learning more active, and intensive for students where students can communicate easily with each-others and also with the teacher [23].

Disadvantages of the existing methods are included as:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 6: Various interaction models exist in learning applications and their advantages and disadvantages.
Response 6: Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20] . So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners. Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22].

Comment 7: Why visualization systems must be supported by human-human interaction in learning applications?
Response 7: Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20] . So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners.

Comment 8: What prevents current AR applications from providing student-student and teacher-student interaction?
Response 8: The current AR applications emphasized on immersive learning experience through AR that lacking in providing student-student and teacher-student interaction. The information is included as follows:

Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 9: Methodology:
To ensure the homogeneity of the sample, it was mentioned in the paper that none of the students had ever used AR applications before. However, the student's initial level of understanding in the area studied before they used the provided AR applications is unknown. Different starting points have the potential to provide different endpoints as well.
Response 9: Homogeneity of the sample is included as follows:
Methods-Research Design and Participants
This study conducted a pre-assessment evaluation of the respondents' knowledge, skills, or understanding in the AR area related to the system before they started using it [32].

Descriptive Statistics-Demographic Profile
It is found that the students scored the same grades in this pre-assessment, indicating that they had the same initial level of understanding in the studied area before using the system.

Comment 10: Discussion:
In the discussion section, the author should not only emphasize the findings obtained from the statistical approach that has been carried out. A more in-depth study to find out what aspects make human-human interaction give better student performance results than human-system interaction needs to be presented with comparisons from previous studies.
Response 10: The discussion was rewritten with comparisons from previous studies as follows:
The study aims to develop an augmented reality application that promotes interaction and spatial visualization for learning calculus and evaluates the effect of the interactive learning system on the performance of learning. Human-human interaction is evaluated as part of the chat function of application and human-system interaction is analysed as part of augmented reality implementation through mobile application.

The first hypothesis was accepted as human-system interactivity positively affected the learning experience factor. As this study developed an augmented reality application for learning calculus, here human-system interaction is related to the interactivity promoted by the augmented reality application. Studies implementing augmented reality in improving learning experience founds that the didactic experience of this technology make students more engaged and hence providing an enriched learning experience [12, 14, 16, 21, 27]. This study has also found that among the human-system interaction all students univocally cancelled out disagreement that it provided them with real world 3D object feelings. The study using similar questionnaire have also found that it has significant impact on the learning experience in general and motivation in particular [39]. So, the result of this study is aligned with the prior relevant studies.

The second hypothesis result found that human-human interaction significantly influences learning experience. The implication from this hypothesis acceptance indicate that learning experience is shaped by human-human interaction which can comes from student-teacher or student-student. In the study design both student-teacher and student-student interaction facilities were provided via application chat function. So, it can be said that both type of human-human interactions are associated positively with learning experience. This result is in line with the findings where both types of interaction led to learning satisfaction [47]. Another study found that human-human interactivity increases learning engagement [1, 2, 3]. In addition to that another study has also claimed that learning confidence as part of learning experience has also increased through interaction with peers and teachers [1]. From the findings of these research, it can be concluded that the result of human-human interaction affecting learning experience is in line with existing research.

The third hypothesis of the study was tested by using paired sample “t-test” where learning performance means were compared from ‘pre-test’ to ‘post-test scenario. The result shows that there is significant relation between the score and “post-test” mean is higher than the ‘pre-test’ one. Other studies have also found that learning experience as result of human-system and human-human interactivity increase learning performance [3, 15, 47]. So, it can be claimed that in terms of hypothesis acceptance, this study is in line with existing literature.

Comment 11: Using previous studies as a reference in the discussion/comparison of research results will provide clarity on the contribution of research in this field of study.
Response 11: The discussion was rewritten with comparisons from previous studies as above in Response 10.

View more View less

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

28 Views

28 Mar 2022 | for Version 1

Yong Wee Sek, Fakulti Teknologi Maklumat dan Komunikasi, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia, Melaka, Malaysia

28 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved With Reservations

What are the existing problems in learning Calculus?
Why is “Revolution of Solids” proposed in this research?
Why is an interactive approach proposed to overcome these problems?
What are the existing interactive methods that have been proposed to solve Mathematics problem, in particular Calculus (Revolution of Solids)?
What are the weaknesses of existing interactive methods in solving mathematics (Calculus - Revolution of Solids) problems?
How are the proposed interactive methods (augmented reality and chat functions) able to solve the existing problem in learning Revolution of Solids?

The major problems in learning calculus (visualization)
How are the interactive activities able to solve the existing problem in learning calculus?
What are the existing interactive methods proposed to overcome these problems? Should discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the existing methods.
What are the major issues of the existing interactive methods?
Why are AR and chat functions introduced in learning calculus?

Methodology

The author may consider sub-dividing this section as suggested below:

Study design and procedures
The design and development of the interactive methods
Participants
Measurement scales
Data analysis techniques

Page 5, figure 1. Research design - Causal not casual relationship
The development of research hypotheses is missing.
Did not justify the adopted questionnaire.
Did not specify the questions for the quiz. Are the same or different sets of questions used for pre and post? How many questions?
Did not mention if measurement model and structural model were assessed based on data collected in the first phase or the third phase?
Ensure consistency in reporting the number of decimals throughout the manuscript (including in Tables).
Please provide information about the ethical applications
Please refer to the article entitled "Designing and evaluating a high interactive augmented reality system for programming learning"¹. This paper will provide some ideas on how to conduct quasi-experimental design, research procedures, and how the discussion was presented.
For the article entitled "Primary school students' perceptions of scaffolding in digital game-based learning in mathematics"², This paper can give some information about the process of the research experiment, ethical considerations, and how the discussion was presented.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

References

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

My research interest is in educational technologies, technology acceptance and information system

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

13 Apr 2024

Sook Ling Lew, Faculty of Information Science and Technology, Multimedia University, Ayer Keroh, 75450, Malaysia

Comment 1: In this paper, the authors introduced the interactive learning system for learning Calculus. There is a great deal of good work in this paper. However, it does require a significant overall revision to make the best of this and present the work in a clear and well-structured way, particularly on the literature review, the methodology, the research design and procedures used in this study, measurement instruments and data analysis techniques to achieve the research objectives. Additionally, the discussion section is not exhaustive to provide good attempt to explain many of the study results. In fact, the discussion is not aligned with the research objectives.
Response 1: We have revised the manuscript carefully based on all the comments and issues raised.

Comment 2: Abstract
Background – the problems of the interactive system are not clear. The authors should point out the existing problems of the interactive system in learning mathematics, particularly in learning Calculus.
Please include the main objective(s) or research question(s) of this study in this section. The research objectives/research questions are not clear.
Response 2: Existing problems of the interactive system in learning mathematics, particularly in learning Calculus are added as follows:
However, calculus learning augmented reality application has limitation in promoting a human collaboration in learning.
The main objective is included in Purpose and Introduction:
This research develops an augmented reality application that promotes interaction and spatial visualization for learning calculus and evaluates the effect of the interactive learning system on the performance of learning.

Comment 3: Introduction
This section should include the following information:
Response 3: The existing problems in learning Calculus are included Introduction – Paragraph 1, 2, 3, Literature Review – Interactivity - Paragraph 1 & Paragraph 2; as follows:

Comment 4: What are the existing problems in learning Calculus?
Response 4:
1.       Lacking Human-Human interactivity.
Although there are some studies that have addressed the issues of student interaction with the system there is still a lack of teacher-student or student-student interaction in interactive learning systems [1, 2, 3]. Many systems have promoted a single type of interactivity [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]. Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity. Past studies in Table 2 depicts that most systems solely focused on interactivity through AR and not implementing any human-human interactivity.

2.       Lacking Spatial Visualization
Application of integration is one of the chapters in Calculus that requires spatial visualization and the 2D medium of the traditional classroom does not provide a proper solution [11, 12, 13]. After consulting with the subject teacher on what the student struggle most in learning calculus, it was suggested that students face difficulties in understanding solid of revolution through traditional classroom method as it requires 3D visualization.

Comment 5: Why “Revolution of Solids” is proposed in this research?
Response 5: The reasons of “Revolution of Solids” are included as follows:
In understanding revolution of solids around an axis, visualization of the solid in-question is very important. Spatially related 3D images cannot be drawn on a 2D board or projected over a computer. These hinder students in visualizing the solid and result in difficulties in conceptualizing the concept.

After consulting with the subject teacher on what the student struggle most in learning calculus, it was suggested that students face difficulties in understanding solid of revolution through traditional classroom method as it requires 3D visualization.

Comment 6: Why interactive approach is proposed to overcome these problems?
Response 6: The reasons of interactive approach are included as follows:
Although researchers have implemented AR to assist in visualization, they are mainly focused on human-system interaction, either through haptic or non-haptic interaction [14, 15, 16, 17]. Besides, agility is another issue that some systems could not addresses as they are desktop-based systems [17, 18, 19]. Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20]. So it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners.

Comment 7: What are the existing interactive methods have been proposed to solve Mathematics problem in particular Calculus (Revolution of Solids)?
Response 7: The existing interactive methods are focused on providing content visualization and included in the Introduction as follows:

Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22]. As such, developing an interactive AR application that facilitates both human-human and human-system interactivities and assists in conceptualizing and understanding math better is needed.

Comment 8: What are the weaknesses of the existing interactive methods in solving mathematics (Calculus- Revolution of Solids) problems?
Response 8: The weaknesses of the existing interactive methods are included in Introduction – Paragraph 4 as follows:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 9: How are the proposed interactive methods (augmented reality and chat functions) able to solve the existing problem in learning Revolution of Solids?
Response 9: Introduction – Paragraph 3
So, it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners. Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interactions.
The interactive methods (augmented reality and chat functions) are proposed as follows:
1.       AR – to implement Spatial Visualization
2. Chat – to improve Human-Human interactivity.

Comment 10: Please include the main objective(s)/ research questions of this study in this section.
Response 10: Main objectives are included as follows:
This research aims to develop an interactive AR application for learning calculus that promotes human-system interaction via AR and human-human interaction through chat functions.

Comment 11: Include a brief description of the methodology and system used in this study.
Response 11: A brief description of the methodology and system used in this study are included as follows:
Pre-test and post-test data from students learning calculus in the classroom using the AR interactive learning system were gathered using a questionnaire and a quiz to evaluate the impact of the developed AR system.

Comment 12: Literature review/Background study
In this section, discussion on the following should be included:
Major problems in learning calculus (visualization)
Response 12: Discussion on the major problems in learning calculus (visualization) are included as follows:
1.       Lacking Human-Human interactivity.
2.       Lacking Spatial Visualization

Comment 13: How are the interactive activities able to solve the existing problem in learning calculus?
Response 13: Under the theory of learner constructing their knowledge Lev Vygotsky theorized that learning occurs through personalization and socialization [20]. So, it is crucial to provide the function to interact among the learners. Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22].

Comment 14: What are the existing interactive methods proposed to overcome these problems? Should discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the existing methods.
Response 14: The existing interactive methods proposed to overcome these problems are included as:
AR based interactive book [5] is a tool used in asynchronous learning. Past studies in Table 1 shows promoted interactivities by different studies. These studies focused primarily on human-system interactivity while a few provided human-human interactivity.

Advantages of the existing methods are included as:
Interactive technology has made learning more personalized and kept students engaged through various applications [23]. This paper also suggested that interactive technology can make learning more active, and intensive for students where students can communicate easily with each-others and also with the teacher [23].

Disadvantages of the existing methods are included as:
Recently implementation of Augmented Reality (AR) in pedagogy has been adopted by many researchers where the emphasis has mainly been kept on 3D visualization. Many have implemented AR in geometry for school students [14, 19, 24] while some other implemented it for calculus [12, 13]. In both cases the authors have focused on the immersive learning experience through AR but no human-human interaction function was provided.

Comment 15: What are the major issues of the existing interactive methods?
Response 15: Unfortunately, majority of the AR learning application only focused on providing content visualization resulting in not a holistic application in learning that promote both type of interaction [14, 15, 21, 22].
Past studies in Table 2 depicts that most systems solely focused on interactivity through AR and not implementing any human-human interactivity.

Comment 16: Why are AR and chat functions introduced in learning calculus?
Response 16: The interactive AR application facilitates both human-human and human-system interactivities and assists in conceptualizing and understanding math better.

Comment 17: Methodology
The author may consider sub-dividing this section as below:
i.        Study design and procedures
ii.            The design and development of the interactive methods
iii.            Participants
iv.            Measurement scales
v.             Data analysis techniques
Response 17: We have re-arranged the sub-sections with the suggested sections such as Study design and procedures, Research Framework, Survey Design and Procedures and Data Analysis Techniques in Methodology.

Comment 18: Study design and procedures – you should discuss the choice of quantitative research method in this research, what is the quasi-experimental design? Why is quasi-experimental design used in this research? What are the procedures to conduct this research?
Response 18: The reason of Quantitative research method was used are added in Research Design and Participants as follows:
Quantitative research designs include quasi-experiments, true experiments, causal-comparative research, surveys research and experiments research. Quantitative research is likely to test theories by investigating the relationships among variables [37]. Therefore, the primary research method for this study was quantitative.

Comment 19: A discussion on the design and development of the interactive methods should be presented here.
Response 19: A discussion on the design and development of the interactive methods is included as follows:
Interactivity can also be categorized as human-system and human-human, as technologies are allowing both in a learning environment [3]. The framework for interactive learning application is developed based on these two types of interactions.

Comment 20: Participants – this study uses quasi-experimental design, the participants should be assigned into control and experimental group. This information is not available. How did you assign participants into these groups? How did you select the participants for this study?
For measurement items, what are the scales used in this study?
Please list the sources. For the self-developed items, reliability and validity tests should be conducted and reported.
Response 20: Additional information of participants is added in Research Design and Participants as follows:
One of the numerous forms of quasi-experimental design is pre- and post-test research. "Quasi" refers to something that resembles experimental study. Studies evaluating a curriculum for education, a treatment system or a simulation training commonly apply pre- and post-test evaluation [33]. Since this study is to compare students' learning experiences and academic performance before and after using the AR system, a pre- and post-test quasi-experimental research method was chosen.
Convenience sampling is a nonprobability or non-random sampling in which it is able to conveniently reach and recruit members of the target population for the study [34]. Usually, convenience samples of university students are used in academic surveys [35]. Since the respondents were students from a Malaysian university taking Calculus subject, a non-probability convenience sampling method was used for this study.

For measurement items, the scales used in this study are included in Survey Design and Procedures - Section B as follows:
All the questions for the aforementioned variables were measured through 5-point Likert scale.

For the self-developed items, reliability and validity tests were conducted and included in Internal consistent reliability, as follows:
All the self-developed questions under human-human interaction variables satisfied the reliability as the loading is >0.6 [33]. For the three self-developed questions (LE 10, LE11, and LE12) under learning experience variable two of the questions LE11, LE12 also satisfy this criterion.

Comment 21: What is the structural equation modelling (SEM)?
Why is SEM used in this research?
How to conduct the data analysis?
You should also discuss the data analysis for longitudinal study using SEM.
Response 21: Structural equation modeling (SEM) combines multiple regression and factor analysis. It is employed to examine the relationships between a group of observable variables and latent concepts.
There are two main types of the SEM. In this study, instead of using the traditional Covariance-Based-SEM (CB-SEM), Partial Least Squares-SEM (PLS-SEM). PLS-SEM is chosen to analyze the data based on its capability to handle complex models and small sample sizes.
Data analysis using PLS-SEM was employed by defining clear research objectives and hypotheses, data preparation, structural model analysis, hypotheses testing, structural model assessment and predictive accuracy, effect size and relevance evaluation [36].
PLS-SEM is often chosen for longitudinal studies due to its effectiveness in handling small sample sizes, which are common in these studies, especially when compared to cross-sectional studies [36].

Comment 22: Results
As the measurement items were adopted from many different sources, instrument reliability and validity tests using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) should be conducted and reported.
Response 22: CB-SEM and PLS-SEM are two widely accepted second generation data analysis approaches. PLS-SEM is used to analyze the data as the objective of the study is to confirm the hypotheses to explain the relationship between the exogenous and endogenous constructs for the following reasons [39]:
PLS-SEM can be applied for exploratory research—when “theory is less developed”.
PLS-SEM can handle complex cause-effect structural models.
Additionally, data characteristics, such as small sample size and non-normal data, can be some of the reasons to choose PLS-SEM.

Comment 23: For self-developed items, procedures to establish instrument reliability and validity should be presented.
Response 23: For the self-developed items, reliability and validity tests were conducted and included in Internal consistency reliability, as follows:
All the self-developed questions under human-human interaction variables satisfied the reliability as the loading is >0.6 [33]. For the three self-developed questions (LE 10, LE11, and LE12) under learning experience variable two of the questions LE11, LE12 also satisfy this criterion.

Comment 24: The result section needs to do a major revision with appropriate analyses. Please include relevant Table(s) with appropriate details such as paired t test results, significant value, etc. for each of the test conducted.
Response 24: Tables 8 to 13 are included to report the results of paired t test results, significant value and other tests conducted.

Comment 25: Discussions
The author(s) should discuss/relate/compare the findings with prior relevant studies. Please also explain how the results in this study relate to previous findings, whether in support, contradiction, or simply as added data. The discussion should be aligned with the research objectives.
Response 25: The discussion was rewritten with comparisons from previous studies and aligned with the research objectives as follows:
The study aims to develop an augmented reality application that promotes interaction and spatial visualization for learning calculus and evaluates the effect of the interactive learning system on the performance of learning. Human-human interaction is evaluated as part of the chat function of application and human-system interaction is analysed as part of augmented reality implementation through mobile application.

The first hypothesis was accepted as human-system interactivity positively affected the learning experience factor. As this study developed an augmented reality application for learning calculus, here human-system interaction is related to the interactivity promoted by the augmented reality application. Studies implementing augmented reality in improving learning experience founds that the didactic experience of this technology make students more engaged and hence providing an enriched learning experience [12, 14, 16, 21, 27]. This study has also found that among the human-system interaction all students univocally cancelled out disagreement that it provided them with real world 3D object feelings. The study using similar questionnaire have also found that it has significant impact on the learning experience in general and motivation in particular [39]. So, the result of this study is aligned with the prior relevant studies.

The second hypothesis result found that human-human interaction significantly influences learning experience. The implication from this hypothesis acceptance indicate that learning experience is shaped by human-human interaction which can comes from student-teacher or student-student. In the study design both student-teacher and student-student interaction facilities were provided via application chat function. So, it can be said that both type of human-human interactions are associated positively with learning experience. This result is in line with the findings where both types of interaction led to learning satisfaction [47]. Another study found that human-human interactivity increases learning engagement [1, 2, 3]. In addition to that another study has also claimed that learning confidence as part of learning experience has also increased through interaction with peers and teachers [1]. From the findings of these research, it can be concluded that the result of human-human interaction affecting learning experience is in line with existing research.
The third hypothesis of the study was tested by using paired sample “t-test” where learning performance’ means were compared from ‘pre-test’ to ‘post-test scenario. The result shows that there is significant relation between the score and “post-test” mean is higher than the ‘pre-test’ one. Other studies have also found that learning experience as result of human-system and human-human interactivity increase learning performance [3, 15, 47]. So, it can be claimed that in terms of hypothesis acceptance, this study is in line with existing literature.

Comment 26: Additional comments:

Page 5, figure 1. Research design - Causal not casual relationship
The development of research hypotheses is missing.
Did not justify the adopted questionnaire.
Did not specify the questions for the quiz. Are the same or different sets of questions used for pre and post? How many questions?
Did not mention if measurement model and structural model were assessed based on data collected in the first phase or the third phase?
Ensure consistency in reporting the number of decimals throughout the manuscript (including in Tables)

Response 26:

In Figure 1, Casual Relationship is changed to Causal Relationship.
The development of research hypotheses is included in Section Methods - Research Framework.
Justifications were added in Survey Design and Procedures - Section B.
Additional information for the quiz is included as follows:

The quiz included five True/False and one formative questions on solid of revolution chapter. The quiz was used in pre- and post-test evaluation for measuring learning performance factor. To avoid question biases, the same questions were used. Order of true-false questions were changed to make sure students did not just follow the similar pattern of answer from the pre-test.

5. Phase three is included in Methods - Data Analysis Techniques as follows: The structural model was analyzed based on the data collected in phase three from post-test.
6. Done consistency in reporting the number of decimals.

Comment 27: Overall:
This paper requires a significant revision to make the best of this and present the work in a clear and well-structured way, particularly on the literature review, the methodology, the research design and procedures used in this study, measurement instruments and data analysis techniques. Additionally, the discussion section is not exhaustive to provide good attempt to explain many of the study results. In fact, the discussion is not aligned with the research objectives.

Response 27: We have revised the manuscript carefully based on all the comments and issues raised.

View more View less

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:

Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested

Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.

Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

[1] 1. Krusche S, Seitz A, Börstler J, Bruegge B: Interactive Learning – Increasing Student Participation through Shorter Exercise Cycles. ACE’17, January 31-February 03, 2017, Geelong, VIC, Australia. 2017.

[2] 2. Lee WH, Kuo MC, Hsu CC: An In-classroom Interactive Learning Platform by Near Field Communication. 2015 8th International Conference on Ubi-Media Computing (UMEDIA). 2015; 360–364.

[3] 3. Blasco-arcas L, Buil I, Hernández-ortega B, et al.: Using clickers in class. The role of interactivity, active collaborative learning and engagement in learning. Computers & Education. 2013; 62: 102–110. Publisher Full Text

[4] 4. Lin T-Y, Chen C-F, Huang D-Y, et al.: Using Resource of Classroom and Content of Textbook to build Immersive Interactive Learning Playground. 2014 IEEE 14th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies. 2014.

[5] 5. Phadung M: Interactive E-Book Design and Development to Support Literacy Learning for Language Minority Students. World Congress on Sustainable Technologies (WCST-2015). 2015.

[6] 6. Contla PX, Kamada H, Takago D: Visual Interactive Learning System Using Image Processing About Multiple Programming Languages. 2016 IEEE 5th Global Conference on Consumer Electronics. 2016.

[7] 7. Hsiao H-S, Chen J-C: Using a gesture interactive game-based learning approach to improve preschool children ' s learning performance and motor skills. Computers & Education. 2016; 95(January): 151–162. Publisher Full Text

[8] 8. Pedersen MK, Svenningsen A, Dohn NB, et al.: DiffGame: Game-based mathematics learning for physics. 2nd International Conference on Higher Education Advances, HEAd´16, 21-23 June 2016, València, Spain. 2016.

[9] 9. Vishkaie RS, Levy RM: Bubble Play: an Interactive Learning Medium for Young Children. 2015 International Conference on Cyberworlds. 2015.

[10] 10. Zhong X, Fu H, Yu Y, et al.: Interactive learning environment based on knowledge network of geometry problems. 2015 10th International Conference on Computer Science & Education (ICCSE). 2015.

[11] 11. Herrera LM, Pérez JC, Ordóñez SJ: Developing spatial mathematical skills through 3D tools: augmented reality, virtual environments and 3D printing. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM). 2019; 1385–1399.

[12] 12. Salinas P, González-Mendívil E: Augmented Reality and Solids of Revolution. International Journal for Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM). 2017; 11: 829–837. Publisher Full Text

[13] 13. Quintero E, Salinas P, González-Mendívil E, Ramírez H: Augmented Reality app for Calculus: A Proposal for the Development of Spatial Visualization. 2015 International Conference on Virtual and Augmented Reality in Education. 2015.

[14] 14. Banu SM: Augmented reality system based on sketches for geometry education. ICEEE. 2012.

[15] 15. Corrêa AGD, Tahira A, Ribeiro JB Jr., Kitamura RKITY: Development of an interactive book with Augmented Reality for mobile learning.2013.

[16] 16. de Ravé EG , Jiménez-Hornero FJ, Ariza-Villaverde AB, et al.: DiedricAR: a mobile augmented reality system designed for the ubiquitous descriptive geometry learning. Multimedia Tools and Applications. 2016; 75: 9641–9663. Publisher Full Text

[17] 17. Kirner TG, Reis FMV, Kirner C: Development of an Interactive Book with Augmented Reality for Teaching and Learning Geometric Shapes. 7th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI), 2012. 2016.

[18] 18. Le H-Q, Kim J-I: An augmented reality application with hand gestures for learning 3D geometry. 2017 IEEE International Conference on Big Data and Smart Computing (BigComp). 2017.

[19] 19. Purnama J, Andrew D, Galinium M: Geometry Learning Tool for Elementary School using Augmented Reality. IAICT 2014, Bali 28-30 August 2014. 2014.

[20] 20. Abykanova B, Nugumanova S, Yelezhanova S, et al.: The Use of Interactive Learning Technology in Institutions of Higher Learning. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education. 2016; 12528–12539.

[21] 21. Yuanita P, Zulnaidi H, Zakaria E: The effectiveness of Realistic Mathematics Education approach: The role of mathematical representation as mediator between mathematical belief and problem solving. PLOS ONE. 2018; 13: e0204847. Publisher Full Text

[22] 22. Lucas HC: Technology and the failure of the university. Communications of the ACM. 2017.

[23] 23. Hussein Ibrahim R, Hussein DA-R: Assessment of visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learning style among undergraduate nursing students. Int. J. Adv. Nurs. Stud. 2015; 5: 1. Publisher Full Text

[24] 24. Yu C-H, Liao Y-T, Wu C-C: Using Augmented Reality to Learn the Enumeration Strategies 0f Cubes. 2016 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering (TALE). 2016.

[25] 25. Nakakoji K, Yamada K, Yamamoto Y, et al.: A conceptual framework for learning experience design. Proceedings - 1st Conference on Creating, Connecting and Collaborating Through Computing. 2003; C5: 2003.

[26] 26. Zerihun Z, Beishuizen J, van Os W : Student learning experience as indicator of teaching quality. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability. 2012.

[27] 27. Freeman S, Eddy SL, McDonough M, et al.: Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2014; pp. 8410–8415.

[28] 28. Krishnasamy S, Sook-Ling L, Tan C-K: Information Technology Capabilities for Mathematics Education in High School: Conceptual Framework. Adv. Sci. Lett. 2017; 23: 8013–8016. Publisher Full Text

[29] 29. Sekaran U, Bougie R: Research Methods for Business. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd; 2009.

[30] 30. Sumadio DD, Rambli DRA: Preliminary Evaluation on User Acceptance of the Augmented Reality. 2010 Second International Conference on Computer Engineering and Applications, Bali Island. 2010.

[31] 31. Serio ÁD, Ibáñez MB, Kloos CD: Impact of an augmented reality system on students’ motivation. Comput. Educ. 2013; 68: 586–596. Publisher Full Text

[32] 32. Reinking A, Martin B: The Gender Gap in STEM Fields: Theories, Movements, and Ideas to Engage Girls in STEM. Reinking, Anni & Martin, Barbara. (2018). The gender gap in STEM fields: Theories, movementsJournal of New Approaches in Educational Research. 2018; 148–153.

[33] 33. Wang M-T, Degol J: Gender Gap in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM): Current Knowledge, Implications for Practice, Policy, and Future Directions. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 2016; 29: 119–140. Publisher Full Text

[34] 34. Hair JF, Black W, Babin BJ, et al.: Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective. Upper Saddle River: Pearson; 2010.

[35] 35. Hair JF, Hult GTM, Ringle CM, et al.: A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publication; 2017.

[36] 36. Byrne BM: Structural Equation Modeling With AMOS Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. Routledge; 2016. Publisher Full Text

[37] 37. Ramayah T, Cheah J, Chuah F, et al.: Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) using SmartPLS 3.0: An Updated and Practical Guide to Statistical Analysis, Kuala Lumpur: Pearson Malaysia Sdn. Bhd.2018.

[38] 38. Cohen J: Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: Routledge; 1988.

[39] 39. Geisser S: A Predictive Approach to the Random Effect Model. Biometrika. 1974; 61: 101–107. Publisher Full Text

[40] 40. Lin H-C, Chiu Y-H, Chen YJ, et al.: Continued use of an interactive computer game-based visual perception learning system in children with developmental delay. Int. J. Med. Inform. 2017; 107: 76–87. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[41] 41. Chang R-c, Yu Z-s: Application of Augmented Reality Technology to Promote Interactive Learning. Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Applied System Innovation IEEE-ICASI 2017 - Meen, Prior & Lam (Eds). 2017.

[42] 42. Ling LS: IARA LP Dataset [Data set]. Zenodo. 2021.

[43] 43. King A: Using Interactive Games to Improve Math Achievement Among Middle School Students in Need of Remediation. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. 2011.

Interactive Learning System for Learning Calculus

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Literature review

Interactivity

Table 1. Interactivities of different studies.

Table 2. AR interactivities of different studies.

Learning Experience

Methods

Sampling method

Figure 1. Research design.

Research framework

Figure 2. Research framework.

H1:

H2:

H3:

Research procedure

Figure 3. Implementation of AR system in class.

Survey design

Table 3. Questionnaire of human-human interactivity factor.

Table 4. Questionnaire of human-system interactivity factor.

Table 5. Questionnaire of learning experience factor.

Table 6. Self-developed questionnaire of learning experience factor.

Results

Descriptive statistics

Table 7. Demographic information.

Inferential statistics

Table 8. Convergent validity and composite reliability.

Table 9. Discriminant validity-fornell and larcker criterion.

Table 10. Convergent validity cross loading.

Table 11. Discriminant validity-HTMT.

Table 12. Collinearity assessment and hypothesis test.

Table 13. Pre and post test analysis of performance.

Discussion

Conclusions

Competing interests

Ethical considerations and consent

Grant information

Data availability

References

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

Comments on this article

Browse by related subjects

Competing Interests Policy

Stay Updated