In this study the impact of an open learning environment with Augmented Reality on motivation and learning success is being tested.

Klopfer and Sheldon (2010) define augmented reality (AR) as “(..) a situation in which a real world context is dynamically overlaid with coherent location or context sensitive virtual information” (Klopfer & Sheldon, 2010, p. 205). A few years ago it was nearly impossible to use this technology within classrooms. Nowadays, everything a learner needs is a mobile device with camera, e.g., a smartphone or a tablet computer and an AR application (e.g., Aurasma). Recent surveys from Austria and Germany show that 95% of twelve to nineteen year old students own such a device and 75% of young adults (16-29) in Europe use the internet on their mobile phone (JIM, 2016; Education Group, 2015; European Union, 2015). Thus, teachers might be able to integrate smartphones to offer interactive, mobile and authentic learning environments with AR within classes (Ferrer-Terregrosa et al., 2016; Santos et al., 2016; Herber et al., 2013). There are some reasons why teachers should do so. El Sayed et al. (2011) found that AR can promote knowledge and skills, so did Mathews (2010). For Klopfer (2008) AR learning environments can help students to organize, search and evaluate informations and Sotiriou & Bogner (2008) found that AR learning environments can increase interest and motivation. According to self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000), choice is one strategy for teachers to improve intrinsic motivation too (Deci & Ryan, 1993).

But there are also some challenges to think about when AR is used in classrooms. Dunleavy et al. (2009) covered that learning processes with AR can cause cognitive overload (Sweller, 2005).

Wu et al. (2013) summarize in their overview of AR in education that there is less research in this field. Most of the named studies describe the implementation of AR for teaching mathematics and science. Stanton et al. (2003) report about AR in museum education and summarize that AR can contribute to students' understanding history in an authentic way.

More research has to be done in this specific field of technology enhanced learning especially in other subjects then the mentioned (Wu et al., 2013).

Based on this findings, first we examine the effect of AR on learning historical knowledge.

Second, we investigate the influence of AR made available in an open learning environment with free choice of learning task.

Third, we explore if the students felt overwhelmed in the AR learning environment. 

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67. Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(1), 7–22. European Union (Hrsg.). (2015). Being young in Europe today. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. El Sayed, N. A. M., Zayed, H. H., & Sharawy, M. I. (2011). ARSC: augmented reality student card - an augmented reality solution for the education field. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1045–1061. Ferrer-Torregrosa, J., Jimenez-Rodriguez, M. A., Torralba-Estelles, J., Garzon-Farinos, F., Perez-Bermejo, M., & Fernandez-Ehrling, N. (2016). Distance learning ects and flipped classroom in the anatomy learning: comparative study of the use of augmented reality, video and notes. BMC Medical Education. Hart, S. G., & Staveland, L. E. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of experimental and theoretical research. In P. A. Hancock & N. Meshkati (Hrsg.), Human mental workload (S. 139–183). Amsterdam: North Holland. Klopfer, E. (2008). Augmented learning: Research and design of mobile educational games. Cambridge: MIT Press. Klopfer, E., & Sheldon, J. (2010). Augmenting your own reality: student authoring of science-based augmented reality games. New Directions for Youth Development, 128, 85–94. Mathews, J. M. (2010). Using a studio-based pedagogy to engage students in the design ot mobile-based media. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 9(1), 87–102. Santos et al. (2016). Augmented reality as multimedia: the case for situated vocabulary learning. Research an Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning. Sotiriou, S., & Bogner, F. X. (2008). Visualizing the invisible: augmented reality as an innovative science education scheme. Advanced Science Letters, 1, 114–122. Stanton, D., O’Malley, C., Huing, K., Fraser, M., & Benford, S. (2003). Situating historical events through mixed reality. In B. Wasson, S. Ludvigsen, & U. Hoppe (Eds.), Designing for Change in Networked Learning Environments (S. 293–302). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Sweller, J. (2005). The redundancy principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Hrsg.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (S. 159–167). Cambridge: University Press. Wilde, M., Bätz, K., Kovaleva, A., & Urhahne, D. (o. J.). Überprüfung einer Kurzskala intrinsischer Motivation (KIM). Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften, 15, 31–45. Wu, H.-K., Wen-Yu Lee, S., Chang, H.-Y., & Liang, J.-C. (2013). Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education. Computers & Education, 62, 41–49.