Further reading on Mobile learning
UNESCO-UNEVOC has compiled a short selection of academic or professional articles that might help to clarify the signification and the use of the term "Mobile learning". It goes thus beyond the definitions stored in TVETipedia while not pretending to offer an exhaustive bibliography on the topic.
Do you know about relevant resources that could be added to the list ? Please contact us or share it on our e-Forum!
Note from the TVETipedia team: It happened that 3 out of the 5 references introduced within this article come from the same journal, the IRRODL (International Review fo Research in Open and Distributed Learning). This is due to its open acess policy, its broad scope and diverse international editorial board, all traits that made it naturally stand out during the selection process. The IRRODL is hosted by the Athabasca University (Canada), peer-reviewed and co-edited by the UNESCO/COL/ICED chair in OER.
A key step to understanding paradigm shifts in e-learning: towards context-awareness ubiquitous learning By GI-Zen Lieu, Gwo Jean Hwang (2010)
As for E-learning, technologies are frequently used as a starting point for defining “Mobile learning” (i.e. linking the term to some types of devices, which are supposed to condition -in a specific way- the learning process, or the pedagogic aspects etc.). This peer-reviewed article provides a good example of this approach, linking “mobile learning” to “mobile/wireless devices”, and hence defining it as a transition phase between computers and networks (that led to e-learning) and technologies embedded in our environment (that will lead to “context aware u-learning”).
In the selected quotes, a figure symbolizing the “shift” from e-learning to u-learning, passing by m-learning, is transposed. It is followed by a table summing up the traits of m-learning compared to e-learning and u-learning.
Bibliographic indications
“A key step to understanding paradigm shifts in e-learning: towards context-aware ubiquitous learning”,
Gizen Liu (National Cheng Kung university) Gwo-Jen Hwang, in British Journal of educational technology Vol 41 2010, DOI: 10.1111
What is mobile learning By Niall Winters (2006),
Defining, discussing and evaluating mobile learning By John Traxler (2007)
Defining “Mobile learning” through technologies (like in the previous reference) is frequent but not consensual. Those two references refuse to only “place mobile learning somewhere on e-learning’s spectrum of portability” and offer a more holistic view on the term. The first reference is the result of a workshop where 10 experts brainstormed on “What is mobile learning”? The second reference is a peer-reviewed article aiming at “exploring the nature and possibilities of mobile learning”.
In the first set of quotes, the workshop experts identified 4 categories of common definitions, before submitting their final conceptual map. In the second set of quotes, the author of the article describes three different approaches in defining “Mobile learning”: Through a semantic opposition to e-learning, through the impact of “mobile device” beyond learning processes, and through the nature of mobility.
Selected quotes
1. “What is Mobile Learning” (Workshop report)
“Mobile learning has been a victim of its own success. Many communities have defined it based on their own particular experiences, uses and backgrounds. This has led to a fertile proliferation of views and perspectives. However, the downside is that the unique nature of mobile learning is becoming very difficult to characterise. … it seems to be all things to all people. …
Current perspectives on mobile learning generally fall into the following four broad categories:
Technocentric. This perspective dominates the literature. Here mobile learning is viewed as learning using a mobile device such as a PDA, mobile phone, iPod …
Relationship to e-learning. This perspective characterises mobile learning as an extension of e-learning. These definitions are often all-inclusive and do not help in characterising the unique nature of mobile learning. What is needed is clarity: in agreement with Traxler (2005), the technocentric/e-learning based definitions only seek to place “mobile learning somewhere on e-learning’s spectrum of portability”.
Augmenting formal education. In the mobile learning literature, formal education is often characterised as face to face teaching, or more specifically, as a stereotypical lecture. However, it is not at all clear that this perspective is wholly correct. Forms of distance education (for example, distance correspondence) have existed for over 100 years, leading to the questions regarding the place of mobile learning in relation to all forms of “traditional” learning, not only the classroom.
Learner-centred. … considering mobile learning from the learner’s perspective, and the definition that: “Any sort of learning that happens when the learner is not at a fixed predetermined location, or learning that happens when the learner takes advantage of learning opportunities offered by mobile technologies”. …
We spent the latter part of the day focusing on how we might re-conceptualise mobile learning in light of what we had learnt. This was done through a single group dialogue, capturing by iterating a concept map of key characteristics. Perhaps, the most revealing aspect of this map is that it is centred upon mediated rathen than mobile learning. This reflect the participants ‘view that learning is mediated by a number of factor, which when viewed from a particular perspective, help in characterising the unique dimensions of mobile learning. … Another interesting characteristic of this map is that the technology itself takes a secondary role.
pp.4-6 (“Current perspectives” and “Resolution”)
2. “Defining, discussing and evaluating mobile learning” (Peer reviewed article)
“In spite of the activity cited above, the concept of mobile education or mobile learning is still emerging and still unclear. How it is eventually conceptualised will determine perceptions and expectations, and will determine its evolution and future. …
There are obviously definitions and conceptualisations of mobile education that define it purely in terms of its technologies and its hardware. … . These definitions, however, are constraining, techno-centric, and tied to current technological instantiations. We, therefore, should seek to explore other definitions that perhaps look at the underlying learner experience and ask how mobile learning differs from other forms of education, especially other forms of e-Learning.
If we take as our starting point the characterisations of mobile learning found in the literature, we find words such as 'personal,' 'spontaneous,' 'opportunistic,' 'informal,' 'pervasive,' 'situated,' 'private,' 'context-aware,' 'bite-sized,' and 'portable.' This is contrasted with words from the literature of conventional 'tethered' e-Learning such as 'structured,' 'media-rich,' 'broadband,' 'interactive,' 'intelligent,' and 'usable.' We can use these two lists to make a blurred distinction between mobile learning and e-Learning. This distinction, however, is not only blurred but in part is also only temporary. Many of the virtues of e-Learning are the virtues of the power of its technology (and the investment in it) and soon these virtues will also be accessible to mobile devices as market forces drive improvements in interface design, processor speed, battery life, and connectivity bandwidth. Nevertheless, this approach underpins a conceptualisation of mobile learning in terms of the learners' experiences and an emphasis on 'ownership,' informality, mobility, and context that will always be inaccessible to conventional 'tethered' e-Learning.
Tackling the problem of definition from another direction, we see that mobile devices and technologies are pervasive and ubiquitous in many modern societies, and are increasingly changing the nature of knowledge and discourse in these societies (whilst being themselves the products of various social and economic forces). This, in turn, alters both the nature of learning (both formal and informal) and alters the ways that learning can be delivered. Learning that used to be delivered 'just-in-case,' can now be delivered 'just-in-time,' 'just enough,' and 'just-for-me.' Finding information rather than possessing it or knowing it becomes the defining characteristic of learning generally and of mobile learning especially, and this may take learning back into the community.
Mobile technologies also alter the nature of work (the driving force behind much education and most training), especially of knowledge work. Mobile technologies alter the balance between training and performance support, especially for many knowledge workers. This means that 'mobile' is not merely a new adjective qualifying the timeless concept of 'learning'– 'mobile learning' is emerging as an entirely new and distinct concept alongside the 'mobile workforce' and the 'connected society.'
Mobile devices create not only new forms of knowledge and new ways of accessing it, but also create new forms of art and performance, and new ways of accessing them (such as 'pop' videos designed and sold for iPods). Mobile devices are creating new forms of commerce and economic activity as well. So mobile learning is not about 'mobile' as previously understood, or about 'learning' as previously understood, but part of a new mobile conception of society. (This may contrast with technology enhanced learning or technology supported, both of which give the impression that technology does something to learning.) …
One can also focus on the nature of mobility in order to explore the nature of mobile learning. For each learner, the nature of 'mobility' has a variety of connotations and these will colour conceptualisations of mobile education. It may mean learning whilst traveling, driving, sitting, or walking; it may be hands-free learning or eyes-free learning. These interpretations impact on the implementation and hence the definition of mobile learning."In “Defining Mobile education”
Bibliographic indications
“What is mobile learning”,
Niall Winters in “Big issues in Mobile learning: Report of a workshop by the kaleidoscope network of excellence mobile learning initiative”, Edited by Mike Sharples (University of Nottingham), 2006
“Defining, Discussing and Evaluating Mobile learning”, John Traxler (University of Wolverhampton), in the International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning (IRRODL) vol 8 No 2 (2007)
A pedagogical Framework for Mobile learning: Categorizing Educational Applications of Mobile Technologies into Four Types By Yeonjeong Park (2011)
The previous references aimed at defining the concept of “mobile learning” and distinguishing it from related terms like e-learning. This peer reviewed article - after defining mLearning through the e/m/u-learning spectrum – goes a step further by building 4 “categories” for Mobile Learning, based on
• the psychological distance between the teacher and the student
• the level of interaction between students
In the selected quotes, the theories behind each criterion are explained, as well as the 4 categories.
Selected quotes
"Transactional distance theory is an educational theory that defines the critical concepts of distance learning. It presents a definition of distance education which implies the separation of teachers and learners (Moore, 2007). … This theory was derived from the concept of “trans-action,” which is considered by many scholars to be the most evolved level of inquiry, compared to self-action and inter-action (Dewey & Bentley, 1946), and “the interplay among the environment, the individuals and the patterns of behaviors in a situation” (Boyd & Apps, 1980, p. 5). Thus transactional distance is defined as the “interplay of teachers and learners in environments that have the special characteristics of their being spatially separate from one another” (Moore 2007, p. 91). In short, transactional distance is the extent of psychological separation between the learner and the instructor. …
The transactional distance is controlled and managed by three interrelated factors: (1) the program’s structure; (2) the dialogue that the teacher and learners exchange; and (3) the learners’ autonomy. …
Nevertheless, when the transactional distance is defined as a psychological gap between instructor and learner, it still contradicts definitions of structure and dialogue. Due to the recent developments of emerging communication technologies, structures of learning are built not only by the instructor or instructional designer but also by collective learners; and dialogue is also formed not only between the instructor and learners, but also among the learners themselves. Working in wikis is an example of how learners build structure through dialogue. …
With “mediation” at the center of the framework, individualized activity at one extreme indicates a form where a learner is isolated from communicating with other students, and socialized activity at the other extreme indicates a form where students work together, share their ideas, and construct knowledge. At the same time, activities are mediated by the rule which can be either highly structured with fewer dialogic negotiations (high transactional distance) or loosely structured with more free dialogic negotiations (low transactional distance). …
As shown in Figure 3, the four types of mobile learning generated in the context of distance education include (1) high transactional distance socialized m-learning, (2) high transactional distance individualized m-learning, (3) low transactional distance socialized m-learning, and (4) low transactional distance individualized m-learning." {Note UNEVOC: all categories are described extensively within the publication} in “Transactional Distance Theory”, “Pedagogical Framework for Mobile learning”, “Educational Applications of Mobile Technologies”
Bibliographic indications
“A pedagogical Framework for Mobile learning: Categorizing Educational Applications of Mobile Technologies into Four Types”,
Yeonjeong Park (Virginia Tech) in the International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning (IRRODL) Vol 12 No 2 (2011)
Mobile learning: Moving past the myths and embracing the opportunities By Tom H. Brown and Lydai S. Mbati(2015)
This peer-reviewed article was published in 2015 and still refer to most dimensions described by the previous references. It complements them by providing examples of "pedagogicales affordances offered by mLearning" and hence giving a concrete idea of what lies behind "Mobile learning". It also describes succintly many "emerging pedagogies" that share strong links with the concept.
Bibliographic indications
"Mobile learning: Moving past the Myths and Embracing the Opportunities",
Tom H Brown and Lydai S Mbati (University of South Africa) in The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning (IRRODL) Vol 16 No 2, 2015
See also:
- Further reading on E-learning, and ICT, two other TVETipedia Further reading articles closely related to Mobile learning.
- A note on the typography, from the TVETIpedia team:
http://www.unevoc.unesco.org/up/TVETipedia_mobile-learning_4b.png
This article is an element of the TVETipedia Glossary.