Dolan mLearning Annotated Bibliography

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/10.1108/02640470710829569
  • 8/14/2019 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/BF02763647
  • 8/14/2019 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.2005.10.011
  • 8/14/2019 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/10.1108/10650740710742709
  • 8/14/2019 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/s007790200021
  • 8/14/2019 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-y
  • 8/14/2019 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/10.1108/10748120910936162
  • 8/14/2019 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/346/882
  • 8/14/2019 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.pdf
  • 8/14/2019 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