Mobile Technology in Academic Laboratories in Engineering

Abstract

This article presents a proposal for applying mobile technology in teaching laboratory and the threefold purpose of creating a safer environment for students, enhancing their culture of safety, and training engineers sensitized to safety, which eventually will allow them to make responsible decisions in their professional practice.

Full text

Mobile Technology in Academic Laboratories in
Engineering*
ANA BELE
´N GONZA
´LEZ ROGADO
1
, ANA MARI
´A VIVAR QUINTANA
2
and IZASKUN ELORZA
3
1
Department of Automation and Computer Sciences, University of Salamanca. Avda. Requejo 33, 49022, Zamora (Spain).
E-mail: abgr@usal.es
2
Department of Construction and Agronomy, University of Salamanca. Avda. Requejo 33, 49022, Zamora (Spain).
E-mail: avivar@usal.es
3
Department of English Studies, University of Salamanca. Plaza de Anaya S/N, 37008, Salamanca (Spain). E-mail: iea@usal.es
This article presents a proposal for applying mobile technology in teaching laboratory and the threefold purpose of
creating a safer environment for students, enhancing their culture of safety, and training engineers sensitized to safety,
which eventually will allow them to make responsible decisions in their professional practice.
Keywords: mobile technology; augmented reality; safety in educational lab; engineering education
1. Introduction
Chickering and Gamson [1] (also qtd. in [2]) have
outlined seven principles for good practice in under-
graduate education to improve teaching and learn-
ing, which can be summarized as follows:
1. Good practice encourages contacts between
students and faculty. This helps students moti-
vate and get involved.
2. Good practice develops reciprocity and coop-
eration among students. This promotes team
work rather than competitiveness, stimulates
the learning and exchange of ideas and how to
react to the ideas of others. The capacity of
students to retain what they have learned also
increases.
3. Good practice makes use of active learning
techniques. Learning is facilitated by talking
about what has been learned, by writing about
it, or also by relating it with what had been
learned before.
4. Good practice gives prompt feedback so that
students may be aware of what they know and
of what they do not.
5. Good practice emphasizes time on task. To be
able to organize time in a realistic way will have
an influence on the effectiveness of their learn-
ing.
6. Good practice communicates high expecta-
tions. The trust that we show, that we want to
achieve and for which we work, makes students
to work harder.
7. Good practice respects diverse talents and ways
of learning. All learning paths are valid, we
must respect them. As time goes by, students
will learn other more sophisticated methods.
Even though each of the above actions has indepen-
dent value, if we succeed in combining them, their
effect will multiply, as they imply six basic actions
for education, namely activity, expectations, coop-
eration, interaction, diversity and responsibility [1].
Consequently, to achieve success in the teaching-
learning process will only be possible with the
commitment and dedication of both students and
university academic staff.
Mobile technology is becoming increasingly pre-
sent in university student life, and its use is fully
integrated in their daily routines. In general terms,
they are able to communicate, locate information,
play, make different contents public, share informa-
tion, or socialise. However, the next step, i.e. to
apply their technological abilities for their learning
process or for knowledge building, is hard for them
to take [3–7].
The potential benefits of these ICTs for education
(more active learning, greater motivation for stu-
dents, sharing of knowledge, better team work, and
so on [8–10]), should make university teachers
provide students with more opportunities for
widening the range of technological tools to use
(which too often only have a distracting effect) and
also enhance students’ learning, when incorporated
into the educational process. This view is in accor-
dance with the European Commission when they
posit that teachers should teach in a different way so
that their learners may learn in a better way [11, 12].
In addition, and as Escudero contends [13], high-
quality university education must be effective in
achieving its goals as well as efficient in the use
and management of its resources. It also must seek
to succeed in their students achieving both academic
and professional targets and competencies which
are well defined, and with a leading role in the
* Accepted 24 October 2014.694
International Journal of Engineering Education Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 694–701, 2015 0949-149X/91 $3.00+0.00
Printed in Great Britain #2015 TEMPUS Publications.

regulation of their own learning. In this process, the
role of the teacher will not only be that of informa-
tion provider, but also of coordinator, supporter,
mentor and facilitator [14].
Engineering is a practical profession, a profession
where the key is making things. Accordingly, the
training of engineers requires academic labora-
tories, where future professionals can acquire the
competencies, abilities, and skills that will be prac-
tical for their profession [15–17]. We consider it
necessary that the learning process of engineering
students should include concepts from the culture of
prevention [18], in order to increase people’s aware-
ness about safety, which will allow them to make
responsible decisions in their professional practice
[19].
2. Presentation
The proposal presented here seeks to increase safety
in the academic laboratory by means of Augmented
Reality techniques for smartphones or tablets,
which are considered technological devices avail-
able to most students nowadays. The aim is to
provide students with tools that allow them to
incorporate a preventing protocol into their work-
ing routines which minimises the risks associated to
work in laboratories and which integrates safety
regulations; all this in order to achieve the acquisi-
tion and development of how to become competent
in risk assessment, which we consider crucial for
their future professional practice.
This work has been developed and carried out in
the instructional laboratories of the High Polytech-
nic School of Zamora (University of Salamanca,
Spain), implementing different levels of Augmented
Reality.
Level 0. Using the QR codes
The first stage will help our students to understand
the meaning of labelling the containers of reagents.
In addition, they will be provided with information
on how to react in critical situations with those
reagents. To do so, we will implement a level 0 of
Augmented Reality, so that students might quickly
access to simple information on the reagents which
they will employ using QR codes and their Smart-
phones or the tablets which are available in the
laboratory (Fig. 1).
Students might have, in just a few seconds,
detailed information on reagents which are used in
everyday practice. This information will include
data on risks associated with the individual pro-
ducts and the interactions between different pro-
ducts used each day.
By presenting this information in an appealing
way, students will find this task more entertaining,
so that they might add it to their daily routine as a
preventive protocol which minimizes the risks asso-
ciated with the work in the laboratory.
On the other hand, obtaining the information
does not involve handling the container. Students
will only need to bring their mobile device close to
the container, which will make it possible to carry
out a risk analysis prior to handling the material and
reagents. The teacher might add an introduction on
the risks of the practice of that day before students
get ready for the work (taking gloves, glasses, etc.).
This information will remain in the device and it
will be rapidly accessible in case the student has any
doubt at a given time while working.
Level 1. Using the markers
The second stage will focus on the handling of the
portable devices of the laboratory (such as a pH
meter, refractometer or glassware intended to spe-
cific measurements). With the use of markers, AR
environments will be created to assist them in their
operation and safe use. With this technique, the
teacher will not need to explain the use of the
equipment every single time. Instead, the work
groups can access all the required information
when they need it, according to their own working
rhythm.
Level 2. Markerless AR
The third stage will be similar to the second one, but
it will focus on the fixed machines of the laboratory,
for which an AR layer with geolocation will be
created. Food Technology Laboratories are
equipped with large machines. This semi-industrial
equipment requires specific operating instructions
and presents certain handling risks. At the same
time, these devices are integrated into production
lines that involve a sequential use of several of these
machines. AR would make it possible for the
students to establish the characteristics and peculia-
rities of the different machines and to locate them in
their physical position so that they can establish
their working sequence during the day and to decide
the working protocols that lead to the highest
performances while minimizing time and effort.
Mobile Technology in Academic Laboratories in Engineering 695
Fig. 1. QR code for Iron III Chloride.

This would mean that the students would be more
independent and they would extend their discovery
learning to other fields inside the laboratory itself.
3. Discussion
3.1 Educational laboratories in Engineering
Instructional laboratories involve a number of risks
related to the equipment and the chemical products
employed. In such places there is a wide range and
variety of hazardous products which might cause
intoxication or accidents when handling [20].
The safe working practices established at each
laboratory include the recommendation of an
appropriate labelling for chemical products, includ-
ing the verification of the label of each product
received, and also the elaboration of complete and
adequate labels for the solutions that are prepared.
Devastating incidents in academic laboratories
and observations, by many, that university and
college graduates do not have strong safety skills,
have elevated concerns about the safety culture in
academia. Calls for changes in the academic safety
educational process and in the academic safety
culture are becoming increasingly vocal both
within and outside of the academic community [21].
Before performing any experiment it is necessary
to foresee every possible consequence derived from
the risks of handling the product, either for its
nature, its state or its temperature, so that the
appropriated safety measures may be adopted.
Every chemical product, whether a substance or a
preparation is to be accompanied by both a Mate-
rial Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) and a label.
The MSDS is provided together with the product
at the time of the purchase, and does not accompany
the individual packaging. It contains information
on the properties of the substances and the risks to
health and the environment, as well as the derived
risks of their physical and chemical properties, and
exposure, handling, storage and disposal controls.
The safety data sheets are not conceived so much for
a general and sporadic customer, but for the risks at
work, since there are lots of products which are daily
used by professionals. These sheets may be obtained
on the web page of every trading house in case they
have not been provided.
The label must be attached to the container, in a
visible place which allows the user to quickly see the
basic information on the inherent risks of the
product, so that it may be handled taking the
necessary precautions. The label of the chemical
products must contain identifications, through pic-
tographs and hazard pictograms, according to the
level of risk of the product. These risk levels are
stipulated and defined by law [22, 23], and they are
based on their physicochemical and toxicological
properties, as well as on the specific effects of these
substances on human health and the environment.
Chemical reagents must contain on their labels:
1. Standardized hazard symbols and statements
which stress the main risks
2. R-phrases which allow to identify risks, and
3. S-phrases which give tips on safety and estab-
lish preventive measures for handling and using
the substance.
R- and S-phrases are identified with numbers from
R1 to R68 and different combinations of this series,
and from S1 to S64 and different combinations of
them.
Within the area of labour risk prevention, Span-
ish universities have established general regulations
in relation to work in laboratories. In this line, the
working group on occupational risks prevention of
the CRUE
1
has compiled and given visibility to
different university initiatives focused on the pre-
vention of occupational risks. There are many
works collected on their web
1
which address safety
at work. A reading of these works reveals that most
of the measures adopted by the Spanish universities
are aimed at the establishment of preventive mea-
sures which affect the academic staff as well as the
administrative and support staff. It is a fact that
these two groups present a higher contact with
chemical products, and are responsible for their
management and their main handling. However,
we should not forget that, in many university
degrees, students spend a considerable part of
their contact hours in laboratories handling both
chemical products and prepared solutions. In most
cases, students have a huge lack of knowledge
regarding the hazard characteristics of the sub-
stances handled, which might lead them to carry
out dangerous working practices for both them-
selves and the rest of classmates who work in the
laboratory.
Even though the laboratories of Food Technol-
ogy of the High Polytechnic School of Zamora
(University of Salamanca) meet all the safety reg-
ulations established by the University, what has
been observed is that the corresponding informa-
tion available for students during their laboratory
practice is supplied from different sources, thus
leading to students’ confusion and lack of the
required attention:
In order to know the risks of the product that will
be used it is necessary to know which phrases are
Ana Bele
´n Gonza
´lez Rogado et al.696
1
Group on occupational risks prevention of the Conference of
Rectors of Spanish Universities – Committee on Environmental
Quality, Sustainable Development and Hazard Prevention.
http://apliweb.uned.es/crue2/documentacion/Higiene/norm-
higiene-lab.asp

associated with the R and S codes which are
found in the containers, with all the explanations
about the risk phrases.
The label of the products might contain several R
and S phrases for each reagent.
This amount of information is multiplied by an
average of three or four containers used in each
practice, which makes the reading of the whole
information impossible to process, especially when
we add the risks derived from the interaction of
different reagents which will be used at the same
time, and which will not be always brought in their
containers.
Even in the case in which all the reagents and
mixtures prepared are perfectly labeled with the
necessary information, (which is not always true,
especially when mixtures prepared from original
reagents are concerned) it would be necessary for
the student to use a lot of working time in the
laboratory every day in order to establish the risks
of the products that will be used in the practices and
the risks derived from the incompatibility of the
reagents that will be used. The student must be
aware of the importance of knowing this informa-
tion to prevent the risks associated with the work
that will be carried out.
These are the reasons leading us to develop the
experience presented here. With this, we seek our
students to be in a safer environment by means of
the use of tools meant to make them more familiar
with the potential dangers, and which allow them to
become more aware of the consequences of applying
protocols incorrectly.
To do this, before starting the practical labora-
tory teaching sessions the teacher will hold an initial
informative session. In it she will explain the safety
rules, the safety data cards, the labelling, and the
symbols indicating the precautions to be taken with
the chemical reagents to the students.
Moreover, at the beginning of each practice
session the need to be familiar with the risks
associated with the handling of the reagents used
in each session will stressed. All the reagents neces-
sary for the session will be placed together in a
physical space apart from the students’ work
tables and will be identified with their QR labels
and codes. The students should consult the informa-
tion about the reagents before using them and the
teacher will consult each group as to how they
should handle each reagent before they take it to
their work station. Indeed during the first labora-
tory sessions, the reports that students must com-
plete each day at the end of the session will include
questions that force them to consult the labels
elaborated. However, this issue will disappear as
the practical sessions advance. The teacher will use
an observation checklist where it will be reflected
whether the students are adhering to the reviews of
safety labelling in their work protocols.
3.2 Mobile technology
Mobile phones are becoming the cardinal feature in
users’ digital lives [24, 25]. Mobile users are con-
stantly connected to the Internet and the mobile
phone has become a source for accessing every kind
of information [26], even in relation to the use of
other devices (Internet of Things, IoT).
IoT is considered the next step in the evolution of
intelligent objects [27–29]. The objective is to create
objects that can access the Internet in any point of
time and space, which transforms them into data
sources with the mere use of small integrated sensors
(similar, sometimes, to a sticker). The sensors use a
unique identification code and allow the object to
store a small amount of data that can be accessed
from an external device that can transmit them.
One way of interacting with objects is the use of
techniques of Augmented Reality (AR), which let
the users add information to the physical world by
increasing the perception of their surrounding
environment. That is, it allows the users to combine
the scenes that they see with computer-generated
information.
As has been noted by Killer and Rampolla [28],
this term appeared for the first time as a reference to
the overlapping of digital information and real
images in 1992 [30], although the first credited
system of augmented reality was presented by Ivan
Sutherland in 1968 [31]. In 1997, Ronald Azuma [32]
provided a definition of Augmented Reality: ‘‘To
avoid limiting AR to specific technologies, this survey
defines AR as identified by these three characteristics:
1. It combines real and virtual; 2. It is interactive in
real time; 3. It is registered in 3D.’’ [32, p.2].
There are multiple fields in which AR is applied
today, as has been noted in [28, 33]: Advertising,
Task Support, Navigation, Home and Industrial,
Art, Sightseeing, Entertainment and Games, Social
Networking, Translation, Education.
Also, different criteria can be applied in the
classification of the types of AR: It can be fixed or
mobile, depending on whether it allows the users to
move [28]; depending on the type of device that
represents the information, we can classify them
into: head-mounted display, mobile display, com-
puter display or spatial [28]; according to the type of
main information that the mobile sensors collect
(camera, GPS, accelerometer, compass), we can
have vision-based AR (markers, markerless track-
ers, QR codes) or location-based AR (geolocation)
[34]; and the level of immersion into the real world
defines four different levels [35]:
Mobile Technology in Academic Laboratories in Engineering 697

Level 0, Physical World Hyper Linking. Quick
Response (QR) codes activate information asso-
ciated to an object (hyperlinks, text, SMS,
VCards, phone numbers).
Level 1, Marker based AR. Markers are generally
simple forms (squares, usually), over which three-
dimensional geometric shapes can be inserted.
Level 2, Markerless AR. No markers are used,
and the information transfer is produced when
the device recognizes images, objects or people, or
via geolocated AR.
Level 3, Augmented Vision. AR is projected
straight on the users’ eyes (via glasses or lenses)
[36, cited in 37]. This model can be seen in the
‘‘Smart Glasses’’ project announced by Google in
2012, available to consumers in 2014.
As we have seen, there is a variety of available
devices specifically designed for AR (the most
ambitious project being Google Glass). However,
their use is not strictly necessary when working with
AR environments. AR can be managed with devices
that are already being used by most students (their
mobile phones) via free or low-cost downloadable
apps, through Android Market, App Store, App
World, and others, depending on phone/tablet, as
shown in Table 1.
In order to implement AR features, first it is
necessary to obtain information via the sensors or
the input devices (mobile, tablet, glasses, etc.).
Second, to process the information that was sup-
plied by the sensors (with a connection to the
Internet, access to a database, object recognition,
etc.), and, finally, to represent the virtual elements
that are superimposed on the real image depending
on the type of AR used in the output device (which is
generally the same one that has the sensors). To
carry out this process, we can use Web applications
or free software applications (Table 2).
3.3 AR and education
AR allows us to mix real and virtual worlds by
overlapping layers. Through the screen of our
device, we can see the physical (real) elements
together with the virtual ones, which appear as if
they were really part of the same environment. This
is what gives the use of AR a great potential for the
teaching-learning process [38].
As it was pointed out by EDUCAUSE
12
[37] in
2005, by combining technology familiar to students
with locations that students see as their own,
augmented reality has the potential to move learn-
ing out of the classrooms and into the spaces where
students feel comfortable. Although it may seem
like this approach encourages an informal learning
that is easily accessible, engaging students in learn-
ing spaces that form connections between places
and contents actually promotes formal learning
and, therefore, the acquisition of new skills and
abilities. In this teaching approach that has been
Ana Bele
´n Gonza
´lez Rogado et al.698
Table 1. Some downloadable apps for AR
App Web reference
AR browsers Junaio www.junaio.com
Layar www.layar.com
Wikitude www.wikitude.com
LibreGeoSocial www.libregeosocial.org
QR code readers QuickMark www.quickmark.com.tw
1QR 1qr.es
i-nigma www.i-nigma.com
QR Droid qrdroid.com
Qr Barcode Scanner . . .
Table 2. Some applications to implement AR
Applications Web reference
ARToolKit http://www.hitl.washington.edu/artoolkit/
Atomic Authoring Tool http://www.sologicolibre.org/projects/atomic/en/
Atomic Web Authoring Tool http://www.sologicolibre.org/projects/atomicweb/en/
Google Sketchup http://sketchup.google.es/index.html
Hoppala http://www.hoppala-agency.com/
Chrome extension https://chrome.google.com/webstore
QR Stuff http://www.qrstuff.com/
QR Code http://www.qrcode.es
Aumentaty Author http://www.aumentaty.com/
D’Fusion Studio http://www.t-immersion.com/products/dfusion-suite/dfusion-studio
Junaio http://www.junaio.com/develop/
Wikitude SDK http://www.wikitude.com/products/wikitude-sdk/download-sdk/
2
EDUCAUSE
1
is a nonprofit association and the foremost
community of IT leaders and professionals committed to advan-
cing higher education.

referred to as ‘‘situated learning’’ by [39], the loca-
tion and place are an essential element, because we
believe, as has been noted by [40], that learning is a
context-dependent activity. Our mind naturally
looks for meaning in the environment in which we
are situated, and it seeks relations that make sense
and seem useful.
A good compilation of experiences, research and
references on the applications of AR on education
can be found in [38, 41], where the authors suggest
that AR reinforces the learning process and
increases the students’ motivation on it, and they
also list a group of education projects that have been
implemented in Europe and which focus on the
applications of AR on Education (Table 3).
The projects described in Table 3 above are aimed
at developing learning based on experience by
allowing students to interact with virtual objects in
an AR environment.
Along a similar line, but this time with the focus
on distance education at tertiary level, we also find
the virtual laboratory SARLAB jointly developed
by the University of Huelva, the University of Cadiz
and the National University of Distance Education
(UNED). SARLAB provides a free software system
for online experimental practice in education [42].
By means of AR techniques, SARLAB allows
students to experience sensations and to explore
with learning experiences which sometimes can be
qualitatively superior to traditional lab sessions. In
[43] it is shown that its use enhances students’
results, as the potential of AR to prepare different
experiments with the same physical configuration is
practically unlimited.
4. Conclusions
The different AR experiences assessed show that the
use of this technique is not only extremely useful but
also that it has a great potential for educative
purposes. However, although many of these experi-
ences are inscribed within the educational labora-
tory, none of them has focussed so far on enhancing
the safety of students when they are carrying out
their practice activities in the laboratory. In this
sense, the work we present here seeks to mitigate
what in our view is a lack of an appropriate
treatment of safety in professional training.
In our view AR has an unparallel potential to
create a preventive culture as well as to train future
professionals appropriately sensitized with safety,
which ultimately will allow them to make respon-
sible decisions in their professional practice. This is
our overall aim for developing the work presented
here and which was implemented during 2013–2014
academic year.
Acknowledgments—The work presented here has been developed
within the Project ‘Augmented Reality Applied to Safety in the
Laboratory’, which has been sponsored by the Samuel Solo
´rzano
Barruso Foundation (Salamanca, Spain).
Mobile Technology in Academic Laboratories in Engineering 699
Table 3. European Projects. AR applications in Education
PROJECTS Description
CREATE9 2002–2005
http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/research/vr/Projects/Create
Mixed-reality framework applied to cultural heritage content in an educational context, and to the design and
review of architectural/urban planning settings.
CONNECT10 2005–2006
http://www.ea.gr/ep/connect
Learning environment combining science teaching in schools with science learning in science centers or
museums with the aid of emerging technologies.
ARISE11 2006–2008
http://www.arise-project.org
AR teaching platform integrating the everyday environment of teachers and students by the development of
tools necessary for the easy production of content by non-AR-experts at a moderate effort.
SCeTGo12 2010–2012
http://www.sctg.eu/about.asp
SCeTGo brings similar comprehensive learning experiences out of the SC into a school’s classroom and/or
everyone’s home operating with ordinary hardware and thus enabling learners to experiment whenever and
wherever they please.
Venturi13 2011–2014
https://venturi.fbk.eu/
VENTURI has created a user appropriate and contextually aware AR system, fully integrating core
technologies and applications on a state-of-the-art mobile platform.
AR.KEY 2014–2015
https://sites.google.com/site/arkeyproject/home
This project develops a training-module system based on AR for non-qualified workers from construction
industry, in order to improve their mathematical competence and basic competences in science and
technology, key to their professional career.

References
1. A. W. Chickering and Z. F. Gamson, Seven principles for
good practice in undergraduate education, The American
Association for Higher Education Bulletin,39(7), 1987, pp. 3–
7. http://www.aahea.org/articles/sevenprinciples1987.htm.
Accessed 14 February 2014.
2. R. Herrero, I. M. Solano, J. Pe
´rez Garcı
´a and J. P. Solano,
Nuevas metodologı
´as docentes en ingenierı
´a dentro del
Espacio Europeo de Educacio
´n Superior [On line]. Comuni-
caciones I Jornadas Nuevas tendencias en la ensen˜anzas de
las ciencias y la ingenierı
´a, 2008, pp. 345–381. http://www.
murciencia.com/UPLOAD/COMUNICACIONES/nuevas_
metodologias_docentes.pdf. Accessed 2 September 2014.
3. M. Gisbert and F. Esteve, Digital Learners: la competencia
digital de los estudiantes universitarios, La cuestio
´n universi-
taria,7, 2011, pp. 48–59.
4. P. Thompson, The digital natives as learners: Technology use
patterns and approaches to learning, Computers & Education,
65, 2013, pp. 12–33. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.022.
Accessed 14 February 2014.
5. G. Kennedy, B. Dalgarno, K. Gray, T. Judd, J. S. Waycott,
Bennett and R. Chang, The net generation are not big users
of web 2.0 technologies: Preliminary findings. In ICT:
Providing choices for learners and learning, 2007, Singapore.
6. T. Valtonen, S. Pontinen, J. Kukkonen, P. Dillon, P.
Va¨isa¨ nen and S. Hacklin, Confronting the technological
pedagogical knowledge of finnish net generation student
teachers, Technology, Pedagogy and Education,20(1), 2011.
7. J. Adell and L. Castan˜eda, Tecnologı
´as emergentes, ¿peda-
gogı
´as emergentes?, in J. Herna
´ndez Ortega, M. Pennesi
Fruscio, D. Sobrino Lo
´pez and A. Va
´zquez Gutie
´rrez
(coords.), Educacio
´n en Tendencias emergentes en Educacio
´n
con TIC, Asociacio
´n Espiral, Educacio
´n y Tecnologı
´a,
Barcelona (Spain), 2012, pp.13–32.
8. S. Bennett, A. Bishop, B. Dalgarno, J. Waycott and G.
Kennedy, Implementing Web 2.0 technologies in higher
education: A collective case study, Computers & Education,
59(2), 2012, pp. 524–534.
9. A.-B. Gonza
´lez, M.-J. Rodrı
´guez, S. Olmos, M. Borham and
F. Garcı
´a, Experimental evaluation of the impact of b-
learning methodologies on engineering students in Spain,
Computers in Human Behavior,29(2), 2013, pp. 370–377.
10. G. Grosseck, To use or not to use web 2.0 in higher
education? Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences,1(1),
2009, p. 478–482
11. E. Silio
´, Transformar la educacio
´n, El Paı
´s, 19 Feb-
ruary 2014, http://sociedad.elpais.com/sociedad/2014/02/18/
actualidad/1392722730_398144.html. Accessed 20 February
2014.
12. C. Redecker, M. Leis, M. Leendertse, Y. Punie, G. Gijsbers,
P. Kirschner, S. Stoyanov and B. Hoogveld, The Future of
Learning: Preparing for Change (Joint Research Centre—
European Comission). Publications Office of the European
Union, Luxembourg, 2011. http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/
JRC66836.pdf. Accessed
13. T. Escudero, Sin to
´picos ni malentendidos: fundamentos y
pautas para una pra
´ctica evaluadora de la calidad en la
ensen˜anza universitaria, Coleccio
´n Documentos, 9. Instituto
de Ciencias de la Educacio
´n (Universidad de Zaragoza),
Zaragoza, 2010.
14. Teacher Leadership Exploratory Consortium, Teacher
leader model standards, Teacher Leadership Exploratory
Consortium, Carrboro (USA), 2011. http://www.teacherlea-
derstandards.org/downloads/TLS_Brochure.pdf. Accessed
26 September 2014.
15. L. D. Feisel and A. J. Rosa, The role of the laboratory in
undergraduate engineering education, Journal of Engineering
Education,94(1), January 2005, pp. 121–130.
16. J. Ma and J. V. Nickerson, Hands-on, simulated, and remote
laboratories: A comparative literature review. ACM Com-
puter Survey,38(3), September 2006, Art. 7. DOI=10.1145/
1132960.1132961.
17. R. V. Krivickas and J. Krivickas, Laboratory instruction in
engineering education, Global Journal of Engineering Educa-
tion,11(2), 2007, pp. 191–196.
18. K. A. McGarry, K. R. Hurley, K. A. Volp, I. M. Hill, B. A.
Merritt, K. L. Peterson, P. A. Rudd, N. C. Erickson, L. A.
Seiler, P. Gupta, F. S. Bates and W. B. Tolman, Student
Involvement in Improving the Culture of Safety in Academic
Laboratories, Journal of Chemical Education,90(11), 2013,
pp. 1414–1417.
19. D. Sainz Garcı
´a (coord.), La prevencio
´n de Riesgos Laborales
en la Universidad, Conferencia de Rectores de las Universi-
dades Espan˜olas, Calidad Ambiental, Desarrollo Sostenible
y Prevencio
´n de Riesgos (CRUE-CADEP), 2009.
20. American Chemical Society, Identifying and Evaluating
Hazards in Research Laboratories. Guidelines developed by
the Hazards Identification and Evaluation Task Force of the
American Chemical Society’s Committee on Chemical Safety,
American Chemical Society, Washington, DC (USA), 2013.
http://www.acs.org/content/dam/acsorg/about/governance/
committees/chemicalsafety/identifying-and-evaluating-
hazards-in-research-laboratories-draft.pdf. Accessed 10
October 2014.
21. American Chemical Society, Creating Safety Cultures in
Academic Institutions: A Report of the Safety Culture
Task Force of the ACS Committee on Chemical Safety,
American Chemical Society, Washington DC, (USA),
2012. http://www.acs.org/content/dam/acsorg/about/gover
nance/committees/chemicalsafety/academic-safety-culture-
report-final-v2.pdf. Accessed 10 October 2014.
22. Real Decreto 363/1995 del 10 de marzo, por el que se aprueba
el Reglamento sobre notificacio´n de sustancias nuevas y
clasificacio
´n, envasado y etiquetado de sustancias peligrosas.
23. Real Decreto 1802/2008, de 3 de noviembre, por el que se
modifica el Reglamento sobre notificacio
´n de sustancias
nuevas y clasificacio
´n, envasado y etiquetado de sustancias
peligrosas, aprobado por Real Decreto 363/1995, de 10 de
marzo, con la finalidad de adaptar sus disposiciones al
Reglamento (CE) n
o
1907/2006 del Parlamento Europeo y
del Consejo (Reglamento REACH).
24. La Sociedad de la Informacio
´n en Espan˜a 2013, Coleccio
´n
Fundacio´n Telefo´ nica, Editorial Ariel, S.A., 2014. http://
www.fundacion.telefonica.com/es/arte_cultura/publicaciones/
sie/sie2013.htm, Accessed 14 February 2014.
25. The Nielsen Company, The Mobile Consumer, A Global
Snapshot. Nielsen Company, New York, 2013.
26. A. H. Caron and L. Caronia, Moving Cultures: Mobile
Communication in Everyday Life, McGill-Queen’s University
Press, Montre
´al, 2007.
27. L. Johnson, S. Adams and M. Cummins, The NMC Horizon
Report: 2012 Higher Education Edition, The New Media
Consortium, Austin, Texas (EEUU), 2012.
28. G. Kipper and J. Rampolla, Augmented reality: an emerging
technologies guide to AR, Syngress/Elsevier, Amsterdam and
Boston, 2012.
29. Gartner Consulting, Top 10 Strategic Technology Trends for
2013, 2013, http://www.gartner.com/technology/research/
top-10-technology-trends/, Accessed 14 February 2014.
30. T. P. Caudell and D. W. Mizell, Augmented reality: an
application of heads-up display technology to manual man-
ufacturing processes, in Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 7–10
Jan. 1992, vol. ii, pp. 659–669.
31. I. E. Sutherland, A head-mounted three dimensional display,
in Proceedings of the December 9–11, 1968, Fall Joint Compu-
ter Conference, part I, New York, NY, USA, 1968 pp. 757–
764, doi.acm.org/10.1145/1476589.1476686, Accessed 14
February 2014.
32. R. T. Azuma, A Survey of Augmented Reality, Presence:
Teleoperators and Virtual Environments,6(4), 1997, pp. 355–
385.
33. A. Y. N. Nee (ed.), Augmented Reality—Some Emerging
Application Areas. In Tech under CC by 3.0 license (2011).
doi: 10.5772/1092, accessed 14 February 2014.
34. M. Estebanell Minguell, J. Ferre
´s Font, P. Cornella
`Canals
and D. Codina Rega
`s, Realidad Aumentada y co
´digos QR en
Educacio
´n en Tendencias emergentes en Educacio
´n con TIC,
Asociacio´n Espiral, Educacio´ n y Tecnologı´a, 2012, Barce-
lona (Spain) pp. 135–155.
35. R. Reinoso Ortiz, Posibilidades de la Realidad Aumentada in
Ana Bele
´n Gonza
´lez Rogado et al.700

J. Herna
´ndez Ortega, M. Pennesi Fruscio, D. Sobrino Lo
´pez
and A. Va
´zquez Gutie
´rrez (coords.), Educacio
´n en Tenden-
cias emergentes en Educacio
´n con TIC, Asociacio
´n Espiral,
Educacio
´n y Tecnologı
´a, Barcelona (Spain), 2012, pp. 175–
195.
36. N. El Sayed, Applying Augmented Reality Techniques in the
Field of Education, Lambert Academic Publishing, Saar-
bru
¨cken (Germany), 2011.
37. 7 things you should know about Augmented Reality, EDU-
CAUSE Learning Initiative, 2005. http://net.educause.edu/
ir/library/pdf/ELI7007.pdf. Accessed 14 February 2014.
38. H. K. Wu, S. Wen-Yu Lee, H. Y. Chang and J. C. Liang,
Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented
reality in education, Computers & Education,62, March
2013, pp. 41–49.
39. J. Lave and E. Wenger, Situated Learning: Legitimate Per-
ipheral Participation, Cambridge University Press, Cam-
bridge (UK), 1991.
40. G. Liestol, Learning through Situated Simulations: Explor-
ing Mobile Augmented Reality, Research Bulletin,1, 2011,
Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE Centre for Applied Research,
2011.
41. J. Herna
´ndez Ortega, M. Pennesi Fruscio, D. Sobrino Lo
´pez
and A. Va
´zquez Gutie
´rrez (coords), Tendencias emergentes
en Educacio
´n con TIC, Asociacio
´n Espiral, Educacio
´ny
Tecnologı
´a, Barcelona (Spain), 2012.
42. University of Ca
´diz (2013), La Universidad de Ca
´diz presenta
el laboratorio de acceso remoto SARLAB. News UCA. http://
www.uca.es/es/cargarAplicacionNoticia.do?identificador=
5807, Accessed 14 February 2014.
43. J. M. Andujar, A. Mejias and M. A. Marquez, Augmented
Reality for the Improvement of remote laboratories: An
Augmented Remote Laboratory, Education, IEEE Trans-
actions on,54(3), Aug. 2011, pp. 492–500, doi: 10.1109/
TE.2010.2085047. Accessed 14 February 2014.
Ana Bele
´n Gonza
´lez Rogado obtained her PhD from the University of Salamanca, Spain. She is Professor in the Computer
Science Department at the University of Salamanca in the High Polytechnic School of Zamora. She is a member of the
Institute of Education Sciences and also a researcher of the research group ‘GRoup in InterAction and eLearning
(GRIAL)’. She also held the position of General Secretary of the University of Salamanca from March 2007 to December
2009. Her main research interests are computers and education, eLearning systems and human computer interaction. Her
main pedagogic interests are to monitor learners in the best possible way along their university education as well as to
facilitate their teaching/learning process, both aspects where she is strongly and actively committed.
Ana M
a
Vivar Quintana (BSc in Food Technology, University of Valladolid; PhD University of Salamanca, Spain) is
Professor at the University of Salamanca, lecturing in the area of Food Technology mainly in the High Polytechnic School
of Zamora. She is also a member of the Institute of Education Sciences of the University of Salamanca, and since 2004 she
has participated in a variety of projects of innovation in education.
Izaskun Elorza is Associate Professor in the Department of English Studies at the University of Salamanca, Spain. She was
awarded her PhD (University of Salamanca, 2004) with a dissertation on the functionality of translation as a formative
assessment tool in English for Specific Purposes. Her research interests include the use of ICTs for teaching and learning
English. Izaskun is a member of the European Association of Language Testers (ALTE), of the Institute of Education
Sciences of the University of Salamanca. She is a researcher of the ATLAS Research Group (Applying Technology for
LAnguageS) (http://atlas.uned.es/index.php) led by Elena Ba
´rcena (UNED, Spain), currently working in the development
of m-learning materials for mobile and ubiquitous learning of English, and also a permanent research collaborator in
‘Grupo de Evaluacio
´n Educativa y Orientacio
´n (GE2O)’ (http://ge2o.usal.es/), a research group led by M
a
Jose
´Rodriguez
Conde (U. of Salamanca).
Mobile Technology in Academic Laboratories in Engineering 701