Upload
alexandradolan
View
219
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/14/2019 Dolan mLearning Annotated Bibliography
1/11
mLearning: An Annotated Bibliography
Cobcroft, R. S., Towers, S. J., Smith, J. E., & Bruns, A. (2006). Mobile learning in
! review: Opportunities and challenges for learners, teachers, and institutions. In
! Online Learning and Teaching(Vol. 2006, pp. 21-30). Presented at the !Proceedings
! Online Learning and Teaching (OLT) Conference 2006, Queensland University of
! Technology, Brisbane, Australia: QUT ePrints. Retrieved from
! http://eprints.qut.edu.au/5399/
! ! ! This article presents a synthesis of mobile learning research and literature in
a review of over 400 published works on the subject of mobile learning. Provides
an analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and challenges in the field of
mLearning, and determines need for comprehensive conceptual mLearning
framework.
! ! ! Rather than advancing views of mLearning in specific and isolated contexts,
the article seeks to identify global trajectories to guide the development of an
mLearning framework. Students are digital natives, a tribe of multi-tasking,
technologically-mediated communicators, collaborators, and content-creators. It
is not just that technology has advanced, but that the dynamics of the learners
have changed as well. Rather than ignoring such changes, educators will need
to develop meaningful contexts to apply technological advances to meet digital
natives learning needs. Learners can no longer be taught. Instead, they must be
given a relevant context for interaction wherein learning is socially constructed.
Todays students do not want the terms of learning dictated to them. They want
to choose what, where, why, and how they learn in a way that is individualized
and personalized, yet highly interactive.
! ! ! Todays students are connected, and do not shut down without a fight.
Educational institutions who demand that learners tune in, turn off and drop out
Alexandra Dolan mLearning: An Annotated Bibliography
http://eprints.qut.edu.au/5399/http://eprints.qut.edu.au/5399/http://eprints.qut.edu.au/5399/http://eprints.qut.edu.au/5399/http://eprints.qut.edu.au/5399/8/14/2019 Dolan mLearning Annotated Bibliography
2/11
of their networks while learning will soon find that learners have tuned them out.
The teacher-centered standardized institutional educational model is dying.
When will educators stop mourning this death, and find new approaches that
embrace the digital life that their students lead?
Huang, J., Lin, Y., & Chuang, S. (2007). Elucidating user behavior of mobile learning: A
! perspective of the extended technology acceptance model. The Electronic Library,
! 25(5), 586-599. doi:10.1108/02640470710829569
! ! ! This article discusses the viability of predicting user acceptance of M-learning
using the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). The study used the TAM model,
and integrated two external variables of Perceived Mobility Value (PMV) and
Perceived Enjoyment (PE) into the TAM to assess user acceptance of
mLearning.
! ! ! Taiwanese Undergraduate and Graduate students were evaluated using a
confidential online survey where subjects responded to statements using a five-
point Likert scale response. The results showed that TAM model, and PMV and
PE variables were useful in predicting user acceptance of mLearning. PMV and
PE were positively correlated with user acceptance of mLearning.
! ! ! Our society is increasingly mobile and connected, and it follows that the more
highly mobile and connected an individual is, the more the individual would value
the utility that technologies whose capabilities were mobile and connected would
provide. Technology that only functions well in one environment or capacity is not
the wave of the future, just as individuals who are only able to function in one
environment or capacity are not as useful or valuable. This study also points out
how the field of education has failed to adapt to change, much less respond to it.
! The technological capabilities of mobile devices for mLearning exist, as does
a market for their use. Why hold back, when the demand for mLearning is clear
Alexandra Dolan mLearning: An Annotated Bibliography
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02640470710829569http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02640470710829569http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/026404707108295698/14/2019 Dolan mLearning Annotated Bibliography
3/11
and present? Perhaps it is fear that holds educators and education back from
mLearning. Not the fear of failure, but the fear that mLearning will be too
successful, and that the enjoyment and mobility it provides will change education
as they know it. Fear that education will be forced to acknowledge and
incorporate change, instead of resisting it, or ignoring it. Perhaps such fears are
justified?
Kim, S. H., Holmes, K., & Mims, C. (2004). Mobile wireless technology use and
! implementation: Opening a dialogue on the new technologies in education.
! TechTrends, 49(3), 54-63. doi:10.1007/BF02763647
! ! ! This article examines mobile wireless technology and its potential applications
in the K-12 classroom. Concludes that mobile wireless technologies provide
students and teachers with the means to learn anywhere, anytime. Without the
portability and accessibility that these devices provide, such learning is not
possible.
! ! ! Mobile wireless technology provides ubiquitous wireless access at anytime
from anywhere. As the capabilities of such devices grow, the affordability and
availability of these devices is also increasing. The more portability, capability,
accessibility, and educational applications that these devices has, the higher the
likelihood that such devices could be used to enhance teaching and learning.
Universal Service laws in the United States require that schools and libraries be
provided with affordable high-tech telecommunications access, creating an
environment favorable to the adoption of mobile technologies in the traditional
K-12 classroom. Students need to practice using technology in order to develop
skills needed after graduation.
! ! ! Perhaps instead of providing educators, administrators, and educational
institutions with reasons why they should be incorporating mLearning into their
Alexandra Dolan mLearning: An Annotated Bibliography
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02763647http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02763647http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF027636478/14/2019 Dolan mLearning Annotated Bibliography
4/11
classrooms, it should instead be required that educators, administrators and
educational institutions provide compelling reasons justifying why mLearning is
not adopted at their institution. The clear and compelling benefits that mLearning
offers are such that those who do not utilize mLearning and mobile wireless
devices need to defend their decision not to use them. Why not provide students
with anytime, anywhere learning. Such devices can be purchased for less than
the price of a graphing calculator, and have applications that extend far beyond
those of the calculators usefulness. So, perhaps the wrong question is being
asked. Not: why, but why not?
Motiwalla, L. F. (2007). Mobile learning: A framework and evaluation. Computers &
! Education, 49(3), 581-596. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.10.011! ! ! This article proposes an application framework for m-learning. The
framework addresses the strengths and weaknesses of wireless-handheld
technology, and the integration of learning technology into pedagogical practice
by evaluating mobile connectivity and e-learning dimensions as parallel
processes.
! Fusing the capabilities of mobile technologies for learning with pedagogical
practices to support and enhance the learning potential of the platform are critical
to successful development of mLearning applications. Wireless handheld
devices reduce barriers to accessibility, which enhances learners ability to view
courseware and complete coursework, expands opportunities for participation
and collaboration, and maximizes productivity, thus allowing the learner to
achieve greater work-life balance while working to obtain greater future benefits
via enhanced educational opportunities.
! Article contends that pedagogy has advanced with technology to become
more individualized, situated, collaborative, ubiquitous and lifelong. Has it really?
Alexandra Dolan mLearning: An Annotated Bibliography
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.10.011http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.10.0118/14/2019 Dolan mLearning Annotated Bibliography
5/11
Perhaps in higher education, but the current focus on accountability and
standardized testing precludes any meaningful, personalized, situated and
collaborative learning in K-12. Is it the capabilities of wireless/handheld
technologies that hold back the emergence of mLearning, or is it pedagogical
practice has not been innovative enough? Is the current educational system too
rigid to permit the development of mLearning to its full potential, mLearning might
allow greater flexibility in access to learning anytime-anywhere, but is the
educational system ready for that?
Muyinda, P. B. (2007). MLearning: pedagogical, technical and organisational hypes and
! realities. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 24(2), 97-104. doi:
! 10.1108/10650740710742709
! This article defines mLearning as eLearning that utilizes wireless
communication devices to deliver content and learning support, summarizes
current available scholarly literature and relevant studies, and calls for further
research and development in mLearning theory and technology.
! Addition of the word 'communication' to definition implicates Web 2.0 nature
of learner centered environment.Learning is a process of giving and receiving
feedback, rather than a passive one-way transmission information. Although
mLearning is a relatively new and uncharted field, criticisms and predictions of
mLearnings inevitable failure as a learning modality are largely uncalled for, as
such criticisms rely on stagnant assumptions of education, culture, technology,
and communications while ignoring role of innovation and progress. Current
research and studies implicitly highlight need for further research in mLearning
theory and technology. Moreover, development instructional design, and an
investigation of organizational and institutional aspects of mLearning are needed
to bring this field to the forefront of education.
Alexandra Dolan mLearning: An Annotated Bibliography
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10650740710742709http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10650740710742709http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/106507407107427098/14/2019 Dolan mLearning Annotated Bibliography
6/11
! ! ! The emergence of mLearning and its potential for expanding content,
collaboration, accessibility and pedagogy highlight the need for such a learning
modality. When will education come along for the ride? The increasingly high-
tech world demands flexibility and collaboration. mLearning will grow as the
capabilities of mobile technologies grows, creating a world where access to
information is personal and portable. World, tech, culture, teaching, learning
models and methods change, nothing is stagnant, except for education.
Sharples, M., Corlett, D., & Westmancott, O. (2002). The Design and Implementation of
! a Mobile Learning Resource. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 6(3), 220-234.
! doi:10.1007/s007790200021
! This article aims to incorporate communications technology into a useful
social context for education by providing framework for design of systems for
technology-mediated Contextual Life-Long Learning.!
! A central theme of this article is the human-centered basis for designing
technology-mediated systems, which specifies that technology is simply a means
to enable people to manage their lives more effectively. The effectiveness of the
technology cannot be measured by assessment in terms of standards,
benchmarks, and performance. Instead the goal is to enhance the value and
reach of individualized learning to benefit the individual. The individual informs
this process, instead of the reverse. Technology should allow users more
freedom, not more mandates. This article reiterates the highly contextualized,
personalized nature of learning.The medium that delivers the content is not as
important as what the content enables in a given context.
! Devices and systems for mobile learning should augment individual
opportunities to learn, do, create, recall, incorporate, experiment, and
communicate effortlessly and intuitively. In the race-to-the-top it is easy to lose
Alexandra Dolan mLearning: An Annotated Bibliography
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s007790200021http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s007790200021http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s0077902000218/14/2019 Dolan mLearning Annotated Bibliography
7/11
sight of the individual context, and easier still to forget what effect that context
has on learning and the individual. Mobile learning focuses on individual rather
than institutional goals, and facilitates, rather than complicate one's life.
Technological capabilities are growing to the point where virtually anything is
possible, but what will we do with that capability? Will we use it to innovate or
subjugate?
Song, Y. (2007). Educational Uses of Handheld Devices: What are the Consequences?
! TechTrends, 51(5), 38-45. doi:10.1007/s11528-007-0068-y
! ! ! This article considers the possible consequences and side effects that result
from using mobile wireless devices in education. Literature review of over 110
published works considers first-level effects from planned controlled use of
mobile wireless technology, as well as second-level effects from unplanned
unmanaged use. Educational uses of mobile wireless technologies are classified
according to six categories with sub-domains.
! ! ! Argues that wireless handheld devices are used in the classroom to reinforce
teacher-centered pedagogies rather than develop innovative learner-centered
practices. In addition, limitations of wireless handheld devices means that tasks
could be performed better using a desktop or laptop computer. Classroom uses
of wireless handheld devices to improve communication and collaboration in
face-to-face instruction generally leads to less communication and interaction.
Limitations of the devices when coupled with the limited educational applications
they are used for, leads to limited learner, giving the learner less control, not
more.
! ! ! Technology is just a tool, and can be put to awful, impractical, and poorly
considered uses. Admittedly, the poor uses of technology far outnumber the best
uses of technology in teaching and learning. This should lead one to criticize the
Alexandra Dolan mLearning: An Annotated Bibliography
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11528-007-0068-yhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11528-007-0068-yhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11528-007-0068-y8/14/2019 Dolan mLearning Annotated Bibliography
8/11
pedagogical practices, not the technology. This article looks at mLearnings
current status with a critical eye, which is needed to help develop the field to its
fullest potential.
Squire, K. (2009). Mobile media learning: multiplicities of place. On the Horizon, 17(1),
! 70-80. doi:10.1108/10748120910936162
! ! ! This article posits the idea that the mobile mediums ubiquitous connectivity
allows learners the experience of multiplicities of place: The ability to be present
in multiple locations apart from ones physical location. The transformative
nature of the mobile mediums ubiquitous access allows individuals to
experience the sense of place independent of their physical location. One can
follow and participate in events across the world in real-time from virtually any
location.
! ! ! Multiplicity of places is the fundamental logic that the mobile medium and
mLearning operate under. mLearning is the personalization of learning.
Learning is adapted to fit the learner, in contrast to the current educational model
which seeks to adapt the learner to the learning. The educational implications of
such a shift are profound. In particular, such a shift poses the threat of disruption
to current educational systems, which are rigid where mLearning is flexible. It is
the antithesis of the way that the contemporary educational system behaves.
Despite the pervasiveness of the mobile medium and ubiquitous mobile access,
education largely ignores the mobile medium.
! ! ! The mobile medium eradicates boundaries, while our school system seeks to
strengthen and reinforce them. Outside the classroom students use mobile
mediums to communicate ideas and information with one another. Inside the
school walls, the opposite message is clear: Cell phones, Smart phones, iPods,
gaming consoles, and other mobile media players have no place in learning.
Alexandra Dolan mLearning: An Annotated Bibliography
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10748120910936162http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10748120910936162http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/107481209109361628/14/2019 Dolan mLearning Annotated Bibliography
9/11
Turn it off, and do not let it see the light of day, or it will be confiscated. These
devices are disruptive, and interfere with the all-important standardized
curriculum with its focus on preparing for standardized testing. This rigid attitude
is exactly what turns students off. Within such a framework, there is no flexibility,
no room to be creative, no space to take an opposing viewpoint, or go beyond
shallow understandings and rote memorization. Is it any wonder students are not
listening? After all, one does not need an iPhone to imagine being somewhere
else.
Traxler, J. (2007). Defining, Discussing and Evaluating Mobile Learning: The ! moving
! finger writes and having writ . . . . The International Review of Research in Open and
! Distance Learning, 8(2), 1-12. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/ index.php/irrodl/! article/view/346/882
! ! ! This article examines the structure and function of mLearning. Concludes
that the filed is still very young, and much research and analysis detailing
pedagogies and technologies for mLearning remains to be ascertained.
However, the field holds enormous promise and opportunity that is worthy of
exploration.
! ! ! Most scholarly definitions of mLearning delineate the field in techno-centric
terms. A need to conceptualize definitions that characterize mLearning as
fundamentally different from other forms of education in terms of learners
experience and expectations exists. As ubiquitous mobility is achieved, Access
to information becomes more important than memorization or possession of
knowledge. As information becomes more accessible, new forms of expression
will be generated. mLearning refers to not only the devices mobility, but the
learners mobility as well. Evaluating mLearning is a challenge, particularly
because mLearning fundamental characteristics make it incompatible with
Alexandra Dolan mLearning: An Annotated Bibliography
http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/346/882http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/346/882http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/346/882http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/346/882http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/346/882http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/346/8828/14/2019 Dolan mLearning Annotated Bibliography
10/11
assessment and evaluation based on formal, structured, stagnant models of
traditional education.
! ! ! How do we define mLearning? If we define its mediums, methods and
pedagogies in stark contrast to those of traditional educational institutions, will
those institutions reject mLearning? Should mLearning instead become a new
medium for delivering tired old teaching methods?
Vavoula, G., & Sharples, M. (2009). Meeting the Challenges in Evaluating Mobile
! Learning: A 3-level Evaluation Framework. International Journal of Mobile and
! Blending Learning, 1(2), 54-75. Retrieved from http://www.lsri.nottingham.ac.uk /! msh/Papers/IJMBL_1_2.pdf
! ! ! This article provides a summary of challenges in evaluating mobile learning,
and proposes a tri-level framework for the evaluation of mLearning. Provides
assessment of frameworks effectiveness in the evaluation of mLearning, and
suggests future applications and extensions of the model for evaluating
mLearning.
! ! ! Presents mLearning as a social phenomenon mediated by technological
advances. Difficulties in evaluating mLearning are a consequence of mLearning
as a complex adaptive system, which is self-organizing. The micro level analysis
focuses on individual activities, usability, and utility of an mLearning system. The
Meso analysis focuses on the learning experience as a whole. The Macro level
examines the aggregate impact of an mLearning system on pedagogy and the
overall educational system. The model emphasizes the individual context and
experience over macro-goals and agendas for prescribed learning gains.
! ! ! What is so revolutionary about this model is the challenge that it provides to
traditional educational institutions and their methods of evaluation according to
standardized testing, benchmarks and learning. The beauty of mLearning is that
Alexandra Dolan mLearning: An Annotated Bibliography
http://www.lsri.nottingham.ac.uk/msh/Papers/IJMBL_1_2.pdfhttp://www.lsri.nottingham.ac.uk/msh/Papers/IJMBL_1_2.pdfhttp://www.lsri.nottingham.ac.uk/msh/Papers/IJMBL_1_2.pdfhttp://www.lsri.nottingham.ac.uk/msh/Papers/IJMBL_1_2.pdfhttp://www.lsri.nottingham.ac.uk/msh/Papers/IJMBL_1_2.pdfhttp://www.lsri.nottingham.ac.uk/msh/Papers/IJMBL_1_2.pdf8/14/2019 Dolan mLearning Annotated Bibliography
11/11
it flies in the face of such assumptions, and challenges their utility on a
fundamental level. mLearnings learner-centered approach, and emphasis on
relevance to real-world contexts is what sets it apart from traditional education. It
is not just the technology that is revolutionary.
!
Alexandra Dolan mLearning: An Annotated Bibliography