Mobile learning - the intersection of birth and infancy

Mobile devices are like brains.  Most people use a very small percentage of the capability of both.

This tongue in cheek statement, whilst based on a modicum of truth has a raft of cause and effect issues which influence how and why people utilise their mobile devices.  This is hardly surprising considering the most recent generation of mobile devices (iPads) first went on sale in April, 2010.

Start a discussion on the above within the context of learning and you’ll invariably arrive at a symposium comparing the technological capabilities of one device over another.  Whilst this is very relevant to both students and lecturers who are planning learning activities it is but one part of the holy trinity of mobile learning.

To continue religious referencing for a moment, the Holy Grail for anyone focusing on mobile learning is the tight intersection of Technology, Pedagogy and Content knowledge as suggested in the TPCK model developed by Mishra and Koehler in 2006.  To see more on the TPCK watch "Punya Mishra Keynote Speaker @ 21st Century Learning Conference - Hong Kong 2012"  below.

While we will discuss the affordances of these devices in the context of mobile learning, the starting point for any educator must be acknowledging it is the learner who is mobile and technology is but a tool. Click here to see Mobile learning (my personal perspective).

Once we acknowledge the above position, discussions can centre on the affordances of the current crop of mobile devices as listed within the Mobile Learning infokit.  Whilst many of the benefits are tacit the infokit lists affordances which “can be measured and made tangible”, (Belshaw, D. 2011).  Perhaps this is an effort to ‘soothe the savage breast’ of education administrators?

Examining each of the 18 affordances in detail is well beyond the scope of a blog post and is probably more akin to a thesis but I’ve chosen three to examine particularly within my own context, that of Paramedic Science Lecturer within a Higher Education Institution.  These are:

1. Promotes active learning.
2. Allows access to learning by those in dispersed communities and isolated situations.
3. Fits into the lives of learners.

As my teaching is completed via distance and none of my current crop of students ever set foot in a traditional classroom, one of my daily challenges is to promote engagement using a connectivist approach. Click here to see more on my connectivist approach

This is achieved utilising a variety of communication forms from the mundane email to collaborate and SMS… all achievable with a variety of mobile devices.  For the record, so far SMS seems to be the best for increasing potential engagement as most students have the device with them at all hours of the day and night.

SMS ‘conversations’ about an interesting case they’ve been to whilst on placement are relatively common but as many students have a tendency toward focusing their tunnel like vision on assessment this is where I find the need to be a little creative to promote active learning.





Within one assessment I’ve introduced Scoopit where student collate, publish, share and comment on resources they’ve found on a particular topic.  Students are informed of apps which facilitate this being done from anywhere with a wifi signal or mobile internet connection.  Whilst not discussed further in this post using this platform and supported app means students have seamless access to their curated content and the ability to comment on the work of others from almost any mobile smart device or computer.

Another example relates to distance students in my Paramedic Care of the Mental Health Patient course.  In one assessment students are asked to design a scenario in which they show themselves interacting with a person suffering an acute episode of mental illness.  The scenario involves them following a systematic approach to de-escalating the volatile situation and scaffolds their learning for attending a residential school where they undertake more complex interactions with actors.  

The scenario they complete within their home environment is videoed mostly using native function cameras on tablets or smartphones. Students are encouraged to do this as it reduces file sizes making them easier to upload and edit.  

Basic editing is encouraged using an app of their choice which has produced some very professional style videos (some with highly amusing parody’s of TV shows and blooper reels). 

The apps available (usually free) include the giants in the video editing market such as Adobe’s Photoshop express, Video Star and Magisto – Magical Video Editor along with a host of others not featured above the fold in a Google or iTunes search.

Once edited videos are uploaded to YouTube (unlisted) with links sent back to myself for marking.  Whilst this is definitely active learning a component I’ve been remiss in not including is to require students to comment on each other’s work.  This would significantly enhance the active learning within this assessment but the consideration is student time.  All of the above is time intensive particularly for those students who are attempting to master the technology and trying to herd a bevy of amateur actors to assist them in this endeavour.

Whilst this assessment task ‘hits’ many of the graduate attributes below there are significant technological challenges for some students and there is a need for support systems to be in place so the technology does not impede learning.

As Mishra (2012) suggests it’s about repurposing existing technology for educational purposes.  In my humble opinion educators must look at existing technology with one eye on it and the other on the Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, Redefinition (SAMR) model.  

Remember we are in the infancy of the current generation of mobile learning.  YouTube was only founded in 2005 while iPads came into existence in 2010.


When put into perspective like this, the need for supporting our students with technological issues becomes obvious and this is particularly so with those isolated geographically or by transactional distance.  All of which leads me to discussing the ‘allows access to learning by those in dispersed communities and isolated situations’ affordance of mobile learning.


Within my teaching context I currently have students in most states of Australia and within the next 12 months it will be every state and two international locations.  With dispersal patterns such as this transactional distance for both the student and lecturer can be crippling if not managed well.  Click here to see more on my reflections on transactional distance.


This can be done using a mixture of native functions of mobile technology and communication enhancing apps.  For example, I utilise a flipped classroom model where students have access to recorded content early in the week and meet in a virtual room toward the end of a week for a case management exercise.
Utilising the mobile app of Blackboard Collaborate along with the native functions of my iPad’s camera and microphone I can meet synchronously with students from anywhere with an internet connection.  

Whilst I’ve very quickly skipped over the recorded content this is no minor undertaking.  With the Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) policy of my university problems of format recently became an issue.  Read more on this in Mobile learning and Why is mobile learning still emergent.

In short and much to the credit of University administrators, the significance of the issue was recognised and a major investment was made in outsourcing video server services to ECHO 360.  The service allows video streaming according to bandwidth along with a huge number of other features.  The project is in its infancy but the early results are promising.

As alluded to earlier I also utilise bulk text messaging on my mobile devices to distribute content, start conversations and answer questions generated from this or other content.  Text conversations have become frequent with a number of students particularly those who’ve grown up with the technology.

I know it sounds strange but in a distance context I sometimes even utilise the native phone application of my mobile device to contact students.  

For me the ‘allows access to learning by those in dispersed communities and isolated situations’ affordance of mobile learning is about exploring, co-creating and sharing.  It’s about access, engagement, new roles for educators and reducing transactional distance to ‘Fit into the lives of learners’ (see video below Challenge your thinking).

From a personal perspective one of the most useful affordances of mobile learning is that it ‘Fits into the lives of learners’ although at times in our busy lives it may seem more like wedging itself into our lives as formal assessment deadlines loom.

For a moment let’s put assessment aspects aside and really consider what our devices allow us to do. Personally I’ve studied business and internet marketing whilst driving to work, web development whilst flying and boned up on head injury management whilst at the gym.  Such is the eclectic and seemingly random skill set mix I’ve come to acquire in this crazy thing we call living.

All of this learning was made possible by combining the native functions (video and audio displays) of my personal mobile devices (iPad, iPod and iPhone) with their ability to connect to the internet and stream or download content.

A range of content is always available and encompasses what Wong (2012) describes as the salient features and dimensions of mobile seamless learning environment, in the above context those particularly applicable include:

• Encompassing formal and informal learning

• Encompassing personalised and social learning (more personalised than social in above context)

• Learning across time

• Learning across locations.

• Combined usage of multiple device types

• Knowledge synthesis 

Whilst this affordance is fantastic it presents challenges for those designing educational content.  There is a need to design content in a variety of formats suited to the multitude of student or consumer situations.

For example those on low bandwidth or poorer mobile internet connections will struggle with high resolution video but may respond better to an audio podcast or voice over PowerPoint presentation.  But it’s not just bandwidth issues we have to deal with.

Adomaitis (2014) discusses the importance of bite sized learning to capture short attention spans online, all of which plays into the ‘fit into the lives of learners’.  I frequently hear complaints from students about a lecturer placing an unwieldy two hour video lecture online so for me I rarely go more than 40 minutes. 

Whilst better I still haven’t managed to find the 15minute Holy Grail as yet...but mobile is more than time frame friendly, it’s about enhancement which Adomaitis suggests achieving by one or more of the following:

• Quizzes: Besides assessing student understanding, quizzes and tests encourage learners to find the correct answers by digging deeper into the course materials.
• Videos: Online videos give a clear view into the learning material as well as an understanding of more than just the text and images.
• Games: As well as being fun, games can add a little healthy competition between learners and liven up the online course.
• Infographics: This is a great way to display data in a quick, easy-to-understand format.
• Podcasts or webcasts: These are audio and video recordings that demonstrate a detailed process described in the course.
• Real-world examples: Courses using this tactic should include links to material that includes “real-life” and accurate examples of the concepts covered in the content. This is a great way to connect learners to events or items familiar which they are familiar.  

Adomaitis (2014).

Whilst considering the above (as a devotee of distance education and of mobile learning) I can’t think of a better time to be involved in this game.  The affordances of mobile are greater than ever with exponential technological leaps being made within very short spaces in time.  

But there are challenges, while most will talk of bandwidth and mobile internet versus national broadband schemes I believe the real challenge is with the educational developer.  The challenge is to plan your learning activities in the small carved out space where technology, pedagogy and content knowledge intersect.  Then plan to adapt your activities when these fail.

With less than 10 years since the launching of YouTube and less than four since the introduction of the iPad we are at the intersection of birth and infancy of mobile learning.  The thing the world needs most now is passionate educators willing to repurpose existing technology for educational purposes in new and exciting ways...to Explore, Create and Share.

References

Adomaitis, M.B. (2014), Capturing Short Attention Spans Online: Benefits of Rapid Learning, Bright Hub, http://www.brighthub.com/education/online-learning/articles/128651.aspx, last viewed 9 August, 2014

Belshaw, D. (2011), Why mobile learning, Mobile Learning infokit,  https://mobilelearninginfokit.pbworks.com/w/page/41751178/Why%20mobile%20learning, last viewed 4 August, 2014.

Moore, M. (1997). Theory of Transactional Distance. In Keegan, D. (1997). (Ed.). Theoretical Principles of Distance Education. Routledge, pp. 22-38. Last viewed 05 May 2014, www.c3l.uni-oldenburg.de/cde/found/moore93.pdf

Siemens, G. (2005), Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age, http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm, last viewed 10 May, 2014, 

Siemens, G (2010), TEDxNYED George Siemens – 03/06/10, TED, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BH-uLO6ovI, last viewed 16, May, 2014.

Wong, L. (2012). A learner-centric view of mobile seamless learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(1), 19-23, Academia.edu, http://www.academia.edu/2612387/A_learner-centric_view_of_mobile_seamless_learning, last viewed 9 August, 2014.