“Awesome! (The T. rex) exploded the crate!”

“It’s like you’re holding it!”

“Can you make it roar? Press the button.”

“Try to make it run or jump.”

“Can T. rexes jump?”

This snippet of dialogue between three 8-year-old boys exploring an augmented reality (AR) informational book vividly captures the excitement and engagement of young readers discovering a new reading technology. In this case it’s an AR pop-up book about dinosaurs of the kind described by Joan Rhodes. The boys’ excitement is contagious.

At the same time, the snippet also illustrates some legitimate concerns we may have:

• Highly engaging AR features may lead to misconceptions (e.g., Children inferring that dinosaurs are alive today and can be captured in crates)  
• Technology learning may eclipse content learning (e.g., Children may learn more about controlling the movements of a digital T. rex on a tablet than about T. rex anatomy, evolution, and so on.)
• AR texts may create expectations about what reading should look like and feel like that then actually make it harder for readers to engage in sustained, effortful reading and thinking with non–AR texts (e.g., “This book is boring—it doesn’t have any pop-ups”)

To be fair, the snippet of dialogue also contains a comeback to these concerns. The last boy asks, “Can T. rexes jump?” AR enthusiasts believe that’s what an AR reading experience can do—ignite curiosity and thoughtful inquiry. Without an AR text, some kids might never become interested enough to ask questions. You need the AR to lure readers in. Once they’re engaged, you can try to deepen the thinking and the conversation.

This comeback may be especially persuasive to parents and teachers who fret that their children will not otherwise pick up a book at all. Still, whatever the current reading habits and motivation level of the children we’re working with, it makes sense to ask, “What exactly are we hoping to augment with AR texts?”

Aspects of learning we care about and want to monitor for growth include the following:

• Minutes our students spend “on task” with books
• Underlying motivation to read
• Level of curiosity about a particular topic or about the world in general
• Vocabulary growth
• Quantity of classroom talk (with peers and with us) generated by books
• Quality of the talk generated by books
• Depth of their understanding of key concepts
• Comprehension and recall of essential information

Which of these would you prioritize with the students you work with? What other indicators of learning would you want to track?

It’s not the tech that’s good or bad—it’s the ways tech is used

There is an urgent need for more research on the impact of e-books, AR books, and other digital media on the reading behaviors and outcomes of diverse learners of all ages. Recent studies with young children by researchers at Wake Forest University and Northern Arizona University suggest mixed effects, with traditional print texts outperforming digital texts and toys with regard to the quality of verbal interactions among readers and comprehension and recall of information. However, drawing big conclusions from a small number of small studies would be a mistake.

It can also not be repeated often enough: Technology by itself doesn’t cause anyone to learn better or worse. It’s how technology is used, in context and with purpose, with or without particular forms of guidance, that may improve—or impede—learning.

Further, often, a difference in a single factor may make a big difference. For example, if students have little or no background knowledge about a given topic (e.g., dinosaurs), an AR book may lead to misconceptions. However, with students who have just a bit more background knowledge, the same AR book may stimulate all sorts of powerful learning—with students learning basic facts but also noticing inaccuracies, fact checking details, constructing arguments, and so on. Indeed, you might purposefully choose a poorly made AR book to teach a memorable lesson about fact checking!

Every teacher needs to be a researcher

If you’re lucky, you’ll find a study that comes close to testing exactly what you want to know about—the impact of a particular AR book and intervention very similar to the one you’re considering on learners very similar in age and background to your students. More likely, though, you’re going to have to rely on studies that aren’t exactly “spot on” to inform and guide your decisions.

And it’ll be up to you to decide which factor(s) or indicator(s) you want to track, informally or systematically, to decide whether that new AR book you’ve decided to use with learners is actually having the impact you want. In an age of such rapid innovation and change, we all need to be researchers.

Paul Morsink is an instructor in the MAET program at Michigan State University.

This article is part of a series from the International Reading Association’s Technology in Literacy Education Special Interest Group (TILE-SIG).