Metadata of the chapter that will be visualized online
Chapter Title Evaluation of Mobile Teaching and Learning Projects, an Introduction
Copyright Year 2015
Copyright Holder Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
Corresponding Author Family Name Farley
Particle
Given Name Helen
Suffix
Division/Department Australian Digital Futures Institute
Organization/University University of Southern Queensland
Street Y304, Toowoomba Campus, WestStreet
City Toowoomba
State QLD
Postcode Q 4350
Country Australia
Phone +61 7 4631 1738
Email [email protected]
Author Family Name Murphy
Particle
Given Name Angela
Suffix
Division/Department Australian Digital Futures Institute
Organization/University University of Southern Queensland
Street Y304, Toowoomba Campus, WestStreet
City Toowoomba
State QLD
Postcode Q 4350
Country Australia
Phone +61 7 4631 1638
Email [email protected]
Abstract In the decade and a half since the beginning of the newmillennium, mobilecomputing technologies have evolved rapidly, enabling increasinglysophisticated methods of communication and interaction. As a result ofthe incremental improvements in design, tendency toward reduced size,increased functionality, improvements in data storage capability, and thereliability and ubiquity of the networks that support them, mobiletechnologies are increasingly perceived as essential to the conduct ofpeople’s everyday lives (Evans-Cowley 2010).
1 Evaluation of Mobile Teaching and Learning Projects, an Introduction
2Q1 Helen Farley* and Angela Murphy3 Australian Digital Futures Institute, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD, Australia
4Q2 In the decade and a half since the beginning of the new millennium, mobile computing technologies have5 evolved rapidly, enabling increasingly sophisticated methods of communication and interaction. As a6 result of the incremental improvements in design, tendency toward reduced size, increased functionality,7 improvements in data storage capability, and the reliability and ubiquity of the networks that support8 them, mobile technologies are increasingly perceived as essential to the conduct of people’s everyday9 lives (Evans-Cowley 2010).10 In the educational context, ubiquitous connectivity and the portable nature of these devices facilitate11 access to collaborative and contextualized learning experiences which translate into greater ownership of12 learning processes (Wong 2012a). Furthermore, these technologies are becoming ever more affordable,13 presenting unique opportunities for facilitating the flexible delivery of contextualized learning experi-14 ences for diverse student cohorts. However, despite the enhanced capabilities of mobile technologies, the15 field of mobile learning is failing to keep pace in terms of pedagogical considerations (Traxler 2007). This16 is evidenced by the relative paucity of theoretical frameworks that focus on the impact of mobile17 technologies on learners and their experiences of mobile learning (Kearney et al. 2012). Consequently,18 most mobile learning initiatives are piecemeal, are poorly supported by the institution, and are not19 sustained beyond the original project funding or continue once the project leader leaves the institution20 (Mueller et al. 2012).21 A significant challenge facing most educational institutions is identifying strategic and operational22 priorities for investment in mobile learning capabilities within a rapidly changing field while maximizing23 the educational outcomes for students andminimizing institutional costs. Over the past 10 years, a number24 of pilot or experimental research studies have been conducted across sectors to investigate the impact of25 mobile technologies on learning and teaching (e.g., Elias 2011; Biggs and Justice 2011; Wong 2012b).26 One of the most consistent conclusions of these studies is that there are still a number of barriers that27 influence the adoption of mobile learning initiatives in education, both at an institutional and at a user28 level. Higher education institutions are cautious about investing extensively in mobile technologies29 because of the rate of emergence of new models and the speed with which devices become obsolete.30 Few higher education institutions have therefore implemented well-financed and highly visible mobile31 learning initiatives that are operationalized within policy and practice.32 A report conducted for the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) e-learning program in late33 2010 indicated that the most prominent issue in the field of mobile learning is the lack of full-scale34 evaluations of mobile technology in higher education (Wishart and Green 2010) and the absence of a35 stable platform from which to effectively research the role, drivers, and impact of mobility on learning36 (Park 2011). Several attempts to conceptualize mobile learning have been made (e.g., Traxler 2007; JISC37 InfoNet 2011; Pachman et al. 2011; Vavoula and Sharples 2009), yet none have been sufficiently targeted38 to ensure comprehensive and rigorous coverage of the rapidly developing and changing landscape of39 contemporary mobile learning networks and technologies.40 This section explores some of the issues involved with the evaluation of mobile learning initiatives but41 further looks at the ways in which these challenges are addressed in a variety of learning and institutional
*Email: [email protected]
Handbook of Mobile Teaching and LearningDOI 10.1007/978-3-642-41981-2_23-1# Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015
Page 1 of 6
42 contexts. This section begins with the chapter, “▶Moving Towards the Effective Evaluation of Mobile43 Learning Initiatives in Higher Education Institutions,” providing an overview of the mobile learning44 evaluation frameworks that already exist. The chapter opens with an exploration of current use and45 pedagogical goals of various mobile learning initiatives. The authors then turn their attention to identi-46 fying the challenges in evaluating mobile learning initiatives. This sets the scene for their critical47 consideration of a number of frameworks including the Evaluation of Technologies Framework (Q3 Ng48 and Nicholas 2013); Critical Analysis (Frohberg et al. 2009), a Framework for Analysing Mobile49 Learning (Sharples et al. 2007), and Pedagogical Forms for Mobile Learning (Laurillard 2007, based50 on work in 2002). The chapter concludes with the proposal of a new framework derived from data51 collected as part of a 3-year funded project in an Australian regional university.52 Though mobile technologies have been widely adopted by students (e.g., see Murphy and Farley53 2012), educators are still struggling with when and how these technologies should be used for learning.54 Melissa Nursey-Bray in her chapter, “▶Moving with Mobiles: Using IT in the Classroom as Against55 Online: A Comparative Reflection from South Australia,” explores these issues. This chapter investigates56 how mobile devices can be used to deliver online content but goes further by exploring how mobile57 devices can be used to transform face-to-face teaching methods using a South Australian case study.58 Tairan Kevin Huang, Jin Cui, Corinne Cortese, and Matthew Pepper delve into how emerging mobile59 technologies can be used for Peer Assisted Learning (PAL) in their chapter, “▶ Internet-Based Peer60 Assisted Learning: Current Models, Future Applications and Potential.” The authors posit that emerging61 technologies can be leveraged to accommodate learning in light of the changing student lifestyle. In this62 chapter, a number of models for PAL are examined along with the technological requirements of63 establishment and maintenance of Internet-based PAL programs.64 In her chapter, “▶ Service-Learning Application in an m-Learning Course,” Margaret Sass begins by65 investigating the rationale and pedagogical intent behind mobile learning or m-learning. These ideas are66 then transferred into the domain of service learning, whereby learning takes place within the context of the67 community in response to community needs in order to facilitate a powerful learning experience for the68 student. Social media can be used effectively to this end, providing a quality learning experience using a69 platform with which students are already comfortable.70 The next chapter focuses on the evaluation of specific mobile learning initiatives in higher education.71 The chapter by Aimee Zhang, “▶ Student Feedback in Mobile Teaching and Learning,” describes a72 mobile learning project titled Tutors in Pockets. In this project, a mobile application or “app” was73 developed for iOS and Android mobile devices. The app was used in undergraduate economics education74 in an Australian university. The effectiveness of the app use in this context was evaluated using both75 quantitative and qualitative measures.76 Emerging technologies bring with them opportunities to leverage the affordances of these technologies77 for learning. Though it is tempting to recreate old ways of teaching in newways on these technologies, it is78 potentially more effective to evolve newways of learning altogether. One of the ways that many educators79 are engaging students in new ways is through gamification, leveraging gaming elements to enhance80 learning. Izabel Rego, in her chapter, “▶Mobile Language Learning: How Gamification Improves the81 Experience,” explores how gamification can be used to promote student learning through enhanced82 engagement. The focus of her chapter relates to language learning using mobile devices. To this end,83 she explores the affordances of a number of mobile applications, specifically Language Learning Game84 (LLG), Duolingo, and LingoBee.85 When e-learning first became popular in education, many educators simply placed PDFs of hardcopy86 materials onto a webpage or learning management system. Very little account was taken for optimizing87 the materials or content for the online environment. Much the same is happening with assessments, where88 e-learning and paper-based assessment systems are merely transposed to the mobile learning
Handbook of Mobile Teaching and LearningDOI 10.1007/978-3-642-41981-2_23-1# Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015
Page 2 of 6
89 environment. The chapter, “▶Transforming Assessments into the Digital Domain” by Rodney J. Clarke,90 explores how assessments can be optimized for use with mobile devices using genre theory. This91 exploration makes use of a specific case study from a first-year information systems subject.92 One of the difficulties with emerging technologies is that they come and go. Just a few years ago, the93 personal digital assistant or PDAwas hailed as the game-changing device that could revolutionize mobile94 learning. At the time of the PDAs’ peak of popularity, tablets were not visible in the device market. Since95 their release in 2010, iPads have changed all that. Along with their popularity for social networking and96 entertainment, educators have been finding innovative ways of using iPads for education. In a few select97 institutions around the world, iPads have been distributed to students and educators on a large scale. The98 chapter from Lynnae Rankine-Venaruzzo and Dennis Macnamara, “▶ iPads as Institutional Game99 Changers,” explores how such an implementation can be achieved with optimal results. The chapter100 explores a number of avenues of approach such as staff capacity building in designing interactive mobile-101 enabled learning activities and assessment tasks and showcasing good practice among others.
102 References
103 Biggs, B., and R. Justice. 2011. M-learning: The next evolution. Chief Learning Officer 10(4): 38–41.104 Elias, T. 2011. Universal instructional design principles for M-learning. International Review of Research105 in Open and Distance Learning 12(2): 143–156.106 Evans-Cowley, J. 2010. Planning in the real-time city: The future of mobile technology. Journal of107 Planning Literature 25(2): 136–149.108 JISC InfoNet. 2011. Mobile learning infokit. Retrieved from https://mobilelearninginfokit.pbworks.com/109 w/page/41122430/Home110 Kearney, M., S. Schuck, K. Burden, and P. Aubusson. 2012. Viewing mobile learning from a pedagogical111 perspective. Research in Learning Technology 20. Retrieved from http://www.112 researchinlearningtechnology.net/index.php/rlt/article/view/14406/html113 Mueller, J., E. Wood, D. De Pasquale, and R. Cruikshank. 2012. Examining mobile technology in higher114 education: Handheld devices in and out of the classroom. International Journal of Higher Education115 1(2): 43–54.116 Murphy, Angela, and Helen Farley. 2012. Development of a framework for evaluating the impact and117 sustainability of mobile learning initiatives in higher education. In ASCILITE 2012: 29th annual118 conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education: Future119 challenges, sustainable futures, Sydney, 25–28 Nov.120 Pachman, M., A. Logunov, and S. Quinton. 2011. TELT evaluation framework – Refinement of TELT121 survey instrument (2nd iteration). Sydney: University of New South Wales.122 Park, Y. 2011. A pedagogical framework for M-learning: Categorizing educational applications of mobile123 technologies into four types. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 12(2):124 78–102.125 Traxler, J. 2007. Defining, discussing and evaluating mobile education: The moving finger writes and126 having writ. . . International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 8(2). Retrieved from127 http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/346128 Vavoula, G., and M. Sharples. 2009. Meeting the challenges in evaluating mobile learning: A 3-level129 evaluation framework. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning 1(2): 54–75.130 Wishart, J., and D. Green. 2010. Identifying emerging issues in mobile learning in higher and further131 education: A report to JISC. University of Bristol.
Handbook of Mobile Teaching and LearningDOI 10.1007/978-3-642-41981-2_23-1# Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015
Page 3 of 6
132 Wong, L.H. 2012a. A learner-centric view of mobile seamless learning. British Journal of Educational133 Technology 43: 19–23.134 Wong, W. 2012b. Tools of the trade: How mobile learning devices are changing the face of higher135 education. Community College Journal 82(5): 54–61.
Handbook of Mobile Teaching and LearningDOI 10.1007/978-3-642-41981-2_23-1# Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015
Page 4 of 6
Index Terms:
Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) e-Learning program 1Mobile learning initiatives, higher education 2Online content, mobile devices 2Peer Assisted Learning (PAL) 2Personal Digital Assistant (PDA) 3Social media 2
Handbook of Mobile Teaching and LearningDOI 10.1007/978-3-642-41981-2_23-1# Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015
Page 5 of 6
Author Queries
Query Refs. Details required
Q1 Please check if author affiliation is okay.
Q2 Please provide “Abstract”.
Q3 Please provide details of Ng and Nicholas (2013), Frohberg et al. (2009), Sharples et al. (2007),Laurillard (2007) in the reference list.
Handbook of Mobile Teaching and LearningDOI 10.1007/978-3-642-41981-2_23-1# Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015
Page 6 of 6
Recommended
