Say hello to AR_Rubric, a tool for the assessment of augmented reality hardware and software for educators. There are 2 versions of the rubric available to users, a traditional downloadable pdf rubric (one for hardware, one for software) and an online AI powered app for filtering and assessing AR powered tools.
You can view the project here: https://sites.google.com/view/arguideforteachers/home
Here are some questions for discussion:
- When educators design AR experiences, what ethical or practical considerations should they keep in mind—such as data privacy, device limitations, or accessibility—especially when spatial AI or persistent anchors are involved?
- If you could redesign one lesson from your previous teaching or learning experience using AR, which tracking method would you select, and how would it change the way learners interact with the content?
- How might curriculum requirements shape the choice between AR/VR applications in education?
- What challenges do educators face in evaluating the long term sustainability of AR/VR tools beyond their initial novelty?
- Is a rubric of this nature considered a useful tool?
- Do you think the nature of the rubric has longevity?
Project Team: Jennifer Chan, Michael, Sean Deon
( 5 upvotes and 0 downvotes )
What a great project and I really appreciated how many AR platforms you explored.
When educators design AR experiences, what ethical or practical considerations should they keep in mind—such as data privacy, device limitations, or accessibility—especially when spatial AI or persistent anchors are involved?
Device limitations and data privacy are major factors when bringing AR into an educational setting. Many people don’t have access to their own AR-capable devices, and even when they do, issues like overheating, battery drain, lag, can interrupt learning and create avoidable problems. Schools may also not have the technical know-how needed for spatial AI or persistent anchors to work reliably. On the privacy side, AR tools can capture room layouts, movement patterns, and personal items, and this data often travels to external servers. It’s important to minimize what’s collected, ensure informed consent, and offer non-AR pathways so all students can participate safely and fairly.
However, I think as long as schools adopt your AR rubric they will have no issue 🙂 Great job!
Thank you for creating such a useful tool for implementing AR in the classroom. I especially enjoy how it has talking points to justify its use.
One lesson that I would be interested in implementing differently is the use of AR to help students understand scale when teaching orienteering in gym class. Geocaching using AR would provide students with a much more interesting task and could help students by adjusting supports for different levels of understanding. As well, by having the ability to overlay real-life and continue to adjust the measurements, students might be able to develop a deeper understanding of how much a centimeter is in relation to a meter. Moreover, the technology would be more accessible as most students have a cellular device without the need to invest in more expensive hardware. However, as many of the comments have already mentioned, the actual app would have to be user-friendly to teachers and students of different ages and technological understanding in order for it to be viable in the long run.
Well done Jennifer, Michael, and Sean! Your OER was very detailed and engaging. The progress of AR/VR has developed quickly and has become one of the most potentially impactful development for the field of education among many.
To answer your question: What challenges do educators face in evaluating the long term sustainability of AR/VR tools beyond their initial novelty?
I really liked that you asked this question as I think it highlights one of the biggest issues we’re seeing in technology which is obsolesce. For example, our phones become almost unusable after a certain period as newer developments change the software and hardware making older models incompatible and therefore rendered unusable. Although this significantly adds to the cycle of negative environmental impact caused by technology, it also highlights the marketing and business strategies that we are practically forced to comply to as technology becomes less optional in our society.
Nevertheless, I would personally love a AR/VR headset, but am currently not willing to pay over $500 for it. Despite its features, having seen the development of many technologies, I know that in a few years the models will be more advanced and perhaps more worth the money then. In comparison, I expect that districts and institutions are in the same headspace on this topic. For anyone that works in public schools, the technology provided is abysmal. The ratio of technology to student is laughable, as teachers need to book technology way in advance. Moreover, finding carts that have enough that function for a class is rare, as broken tech is taken away to be fixed and is never seen nor replaced again (to be fair, students do treat them like scrap).
So, for a district or educator to invest in a technology where no one is trained to use it or there is not enough academically relevant apps/resources, it can and will become quickly obsolete. Though I think AR/VR are necessary to prepare students for the future, the lack of technology and IT investment and infrastructure will not be able to sustain the growth and development of new technologies.
Thank you so much for sharing such an insightful and comprehensive presentation on the use of AR and the AR rubric in educational settings, as someone new to this field, I found the presentation really inspiring and rewarding.
I particularly impressed with the design of the AR teaching tool, Augmented Reality Hardware and Software evaluation rubrics. This is highly sophisticated and professional to me. It includes important assessment criteria and dimensions, such as the pedagogical values of the AR tools, the user experience, technical viability, and Cost-effectiveness and the data privacy issues, which are also essential and valuable for the educators who are considering adoption.
Based on your design, I would also like to suggest for the educators who are going to use these rubric, they could also incorporate their weighting mechanism, setting their weighting for different criteria would significantly increase the rubrics’ practical utility for them based on their circumstances. For example, if they have tight budget, the weight for the cost might be lower, or if they are concerned more about the pedagogical value, then they can weight for pedagogical value higher.
Finally, regarding the ethical questions, I think it is essential for the educators to understand the data collected by the device and ensuring compliance with local data privacy regulations. But on the other hand, the main practical challenge lies in the Timelines of our data protection measures. AR technology grow so rapidly. How to ensure that our data protection policies are dynamic and continuously updated to address these fast-changing technological risks is another important topic to us.
Hi Jennifer, Michael, and Sean,
I really enjoyed your presentation and came away with a much clearer sense of what augmented reality can offer. I had only a surface-level understanding before, and your work helped me see its potential in a much more concrete way. One practical concern that stands out for me when it comes to implementing AR technologies relates to the support teachers need when such technologies are introduced, as even well-designed AR experiences will not work as intended if teachers are unsure how to use the tools, troubleshoot issues, or adapt activities for different learners. Time is already stretched thin, and meaningful implementation depends on access to training, guidance, and the right devices. With teachers coming in with very different levels of confidence and experience, it can be difficult for districts to provide the funding and time required to build that comfort. With thoughtful planning, though, AR could become an incredible tool in classrooms. If more schools were able to develop programs that train teachers and fund classrooms with reliable devices, I believe that richer learning experiences would be open to more students. I can imagine many opportunities in my own English classes where technologies like this could help students build a deeper understanding of stories, settings, and characters, and it would be exciting to see AR technologies implemented in more learning spaces to enhance student experiences.
You raised an essential point: without time, training, and confidence, even excellent AR tools won’t support meaningful learning. Teachers already carry heavy workloads, and uneven device access or tech experience can make implementation feel overwhelming. A more sustainable solution may need to happen at the district or government level. When infrastructure, training hours, and device reliability are handled system-wide, teachers can focus on teaching instead of troubleshooting.
There’s also room for collaborative content creation. Instead of relying only on commercial vendors, schools and universities could build AR lessons together—for example, MET students working with CS or math undergraduates to design K–12 learning tools. Over time, this could grow into a shared AR resource library that any teacher can use like this Knowledge Mill. With stronger support structures and co-creation models, AR can move from experimental to practical in everyday classrooms.