Mobile devices in education: breakthroughs in research and practice / 9781799817574, 9781799817581

Citation preview

Mobile Devices in Education: Breakthroughs in Research and Practice

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Information Resources Management Association USA

Published in the United States of America by IGI Global Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global) 701 E. Chocolate Avenue Hershey PA, USA 17033 Tel: 717-533-8845 Fax: 717-533-8661 E-mail: [email protected] Web site: http://www.igi-global.com Copyright © 2020 by IGI Global. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or distributed in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, without written permission from the publisher. Product or company names used in this set are for identification purposes only. Inclusion of the names of the products or companies does not indicate a claim of ownership by IGI Global of the trademark or registered trademark. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Information Resources Management Association, editor. Title: Mobile devices in education : breakthroughs in research and practice / Information Resources Management Association. Description: Hershey, PA : Information Science Reference, 2020. | Includes bibliographical references and index. | Summary: “”This book is a collection of innovative research on the methods and applications of mobile technologies in learning and explores best practices of mobile learning in educational settings”--Provided by publisher”-- Provided by publisher. Identifiers: LCCN 2019034080 (print) | LCCN 2019034081 (ebook) | ISBN 9781799817574 (hardcover) | ISBN 9781799817581 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Mobile communication systems in education--Case studies. | Mobile apps--Case studies. Classification: LCC LB1044.84 .M583 2020 (print) | LCC LB1044.84 (ebook) | DDC 371.33--dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019034080 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019034081 British Cataloguing in Publication Data A Cataloguing in Publication record for this book is available from the British Library. The views expressed in this book are those of the authors, but not necessarily of the publisher.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

For electronic access to this publication, please contact: [email protected].

Editor-in-Chief Mehdi Khosrow-Pour, DBA Information Resources Management Association, USA

Associate Editors Steve Clarke, University of Hull, UK Murray E. Jennex, San Diego State University, USA Ari-Veikko Anttiroiko, University of Tampere, Finland

Editorial Advisory Board

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Sherif Kamel, American University in Cairo, Egypt In Lee, Western Illinois University, USA Jerzy Kisielnicki, Warsaw University, Poland Amar Gupta, Arizona University, USA Craig van Slyke, University of Central Florida, USA John Wang, Montclair State University, USA Vishanth Weerakkody, Brunel University, UK



Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

List of Contributors

Akçayır, Gökçe / Gazi University, Turkey......................................................................................... 937 Amadieu, Franck / University of Toulouse, France.......................................................................... 697 Annarumma, Maria / Università degli Studi di Salerno, Italy......................................................... 530 Asino, Tutaleni I. / Oklahoma State University, USA......................................................................... 489 Asunka, Stephen / Ghana Technology University College, Ghana................................................... 903 Baker, Alesha D. / Oklahoma State University, USA......................................................................... 489 Baldasso, Lucas / Unisinos, Brazil.................................................................................................... 545 Bañares-Marivela, Elena / Universidad de Alcalá, Spain................................................................ 858 Barbosa, Jorge Luis Victória / Unisinos, Brazil............................................................................... 545 Barth, Ingrid / Tel Aviv University, Israel......................................................................................... 125 Baytiyeh, Hoda / The American University of Beirut, Lebanon........................................................ 460 Bennani, Farah / CCCOnline.org, USA............................................................................................ 392 Bocheco, Otávio / Instituto Federal Catarinense, Brazil........................................................... 265, 336 Burgin, Stephen R. / University of Arkansas, USA............................................................................ 560 Cardullo, Victoria / Auburn University, USA................................................................................... 277 Cardullo, Victoria M. / Auburn University, USA............................................................................... 752 Cashin, Anthony / GEMS Metropole School, UAE........................................................................... 773 Ceran, Onur / Gazi University, Turkey.............................................................................................. 937 Chand, Sailesh / Fiji National University, Fiji.................................................................................. 642 Chen, Yi-Ru / National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan..................................................................... 840 Clark, LeNessa L. / University of South Carolina, Aiken, USA & Auburn University, USA........................................................................................................................................ 277, 752 Crompton, Helen / Old Dominion University, USA.......................................................................... 560 De Paor, Declan G. / Old Dominion University, USA........................................................................ 560 de Reina, Oriol / Universitat Ramon Llull, Spain.............................................................................. 629 Dekhane, Sonal / Georgia Gwinnett College, USA........................................................................... 576 Dimitropoulos, Angelos / American Community Schools (ACS) Athens, Greece............................... 87 Doukanari, Elli / University of Nicosia, Cyprus................................................................................. 32 Doyeni, Olubimtan Ayo / Federal University of Technology, Nigeria............................................... 966 Farah, Yara N. / College of William and Mary, USA....................................................................... 1058 Fawsitt, John / Kibi International University, Japan........................................................................ 146 Ferreira, Ana Paula / Agrupamento de Escolas Artur Gonçalves, Portugal..................................... 156 Ferrer, Álvaro / Universitat Ramon Llull, Spain............................................................................... 629 Fokides, Emmanuel / University of the Aegean, Greece........................................................... 787, 805 Fonseca, David / Universitat Ramon Llull, Spain.............................................................................. 629  

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.



Forkosh-Baruch, Alona / Levinsky College of Education, Israel..................................................... 298 Fulgencio, Jose L. / Oklahoma State University, USA....................................................................... 489 Gezgin, Deniz Mertkan / Trakya University, Turkey........................................................................... 68 Gomes, Clement Vashkar / Columbia University, USA.................................................................... 101 Gómez, Macarena / Universitat Ramon Llull, Spain........................................................................ 629 Gosekwang, Keorapetse / Botswana International University of Science and Technology, Botswana....................................................................................................................................... 210 Gregory, Kristen / Old Dominion University, USA........................................................................... 560 Gün, Ezgi Tosik / Gazi University, Turkey......................................................................................... 937 Hartsell, Taralynn / Valdosta State University, USA........................................................................ 312 Heard, Irvin Renzell / University of the Cumberlands, USA............................................................. 325 Herrera-Bernal, José-Alberto / Tecnologico de Monterrey, Mexico................................................. 44 Isinkaye, Folasade Olubusola / Ekiti State University, Nigeria......................................................... 966 Ismail, Abdullah / Ajman University, UAE....................................................................................... 773 Jackson, Keonta N. / Texas A&M University, Commerce, USA........................................................ 822 Jackson, Nykela H. / University of Central Arkansas, USA................................................................... 1 Jantjies, Mmaki / University of the Western Cape, South Africa.................................................... 1022 Jiang, Guhuai / Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University, China........................................................... 125 Johnson, Cynthia / Georgia Gwinnett College, USA........................................................................ 576 Jones, Sherry / Rocky Mountain College of Art and Design, USA.................................................... 392 Joordens, Matthew / Deakin University, Australia........................................................................... 721 Joy, Mike / University of Warwick, UK............................................................................................ 1022 Juarez-Paz, Anna Victoria Ortiz / Indiana University of Pennsylvania, USA................................. 474 Junior, José Carlos da Silva Freitas / Unisinos, Brazil.................................................................... 545 Kan, Qian / The Open University, UK............................................................................................... 180 Karataş, Serçin / Gazi University, Turkey......................................................................................... 937 Kebonang, Tebogo / Botswana International University of Science and Technology, Botswana....................................................................................................................................... 210 Kelebeng, Kushatha / Botswana International University of Science and Technology, Botswana....................................................................................................................................... 210 Kılıç, Mustafa / Gazi University, Turkey........................................................................................... 937 Kim, Byoung Gwan / Yonsei University, Korea................................................................................. 508 Klein, Amarolinda Zanela / Unisinos, Brazil.................................................................................... 545 Koçak, Ömer / Erzincan University, Turkey...................................................................................... 737 Köse, Nimet Özgül Ünsal / Gazi University, Turkey.......................................................................... 937 Ktoridou, Despo / University of Nicosia, Cyprus................................................................................ 32 Kumar, Bimal Aklesh / Fiji National University, Fiji........................................................................ 642 Kurşun, Engin / Atatürk University, Turkey...................................................................................... 737 Lawal, Bolanle Idayat / University of Ilorin, Nigeria........................................................................ 667 Lescarret, Colin / University of Toulouse, France............................................................................ 697 Li, Xiaoqing / University of Illinois at Springfield, USA................................................................... 354 Liu, Fang / Suzhou University of Science and Technology, China..................................................... 125 Luchs, Christopher / CCCOnline.org, USA..................................................................................... 392 MacCallum, Kathryn / Eastern Institute of Technology, New Zealand........................................... 983 Machfud, Fitria Maulida / International Islamic University Malaysia, Malaysia............................ 599 Mahmud, Murni / International Islamic University Malaysia, Malaysia........................................ 599

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.



Mangwa, Tebogo / Botswana International University of Science and Technology, Botswana........ 210 Manso, António / Instituto Politécnico de Tomar, Portugal.............................................................. 156 Mariné, Claudette / University of Toulouse, France......................................................................... 697 Marques, Célio Gonçalo Cardoso / Instituto Politécnico de Tomar, Portugal.................................. 156 Mattiello da Silva, Juliana Vitória Vieira Mattiello / Unisinos, Brazil.......................................... 545 Meishar-Tal, Hagit / Holon Institute of Technology, Israel.............................................................. 298 Mensah, Felicia Moore / Columbia University, USA......................................................................... 101 Mlalazi, Rebaone / Botswana International University of Science and Technology, Botswana....... 210 Morapedi, Thotobolo / Botswana International University of Science and Technology, Botswana....................................................................................................................................... 210 Morgado, Felisbela / Agrupamento de Escolas Artur Gonçalves, Portugal..................................... 156 Morgana, Valentina / Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Italy.............................................. 881 Moser, Stephanie / Technical University of Munich, Germany......................................................... 421 Mtenzi, Fredrick Japhet / Dublin Institute of Technology, Ireland................................................... 656 Navarro, Isidro / Universitat Ramon Llull, Spain............................................................................. 629 Nielit, Stephen G. / National Institute of Electronics and Information Technology, India................ 928 Novak, Kae / Front Range Community College, USA........................................................................ 392 O’Connor Jr., Johnny R. / Lamar University, USA.......................................................................... 822 Ojokoh, Bolanle Adefowoke / Federal University of Technology, Nigeria........................................ 966 Ossiannilsson, Ebba / Swedish Association for Distance Education, Sweden & ICDE OER Advocacy Committee, Norway & ICDE Quality Network Europe, Norway................................... 15 O’Sullivan, Linda / Institute of Art, Design and Technology, Ireland.............................................. 225 Ou, Kuo-Liang / National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan................................................................. 840 Oyewusi, Mary Bose / University of Ilorin, Nigeria.......................................................................... 667 Paragas, Fernando de la Cruz / University of the Philippines Diliman, The Philippines................ 439 Parsons, David / The Mind Lab by Unitec, New Zealand.................................................................. 983 Pecoste, Charly / University of Toulouse, France.............................................................................. 697 Phalaagae, Pendukeni / Botswana International University of Science and Technology, Botswana....................................................................................................................................... 210 Pirhonen, Antti / University of Jyväskylä, Finland........................................................................... 171 Ramírez-Hernández, Darinka del Carmen / Tecnologico de Monterrey, Mexico............................ 44 Ramírez-Montoya, María-Soledad / Tecnologico de Monterrey, Mexico......................................... 44 Rayón-Rumayor, Laura / Universidad de Alcalá, Spain.................................................................. 858 Riaza, Blanca García / University of Salamanca, Spain.................................................................... 374 Rodríguez, Ana Iglesias / University of Salamanca, Spain............................................................... 374 Rousi, Rebekah / University of Jyväskylä, Finland........................................................................... 171 S., Thanuskodi / Alagappa University, India.................................................................................... 928 Şad, Süleyman Nihat / Inonu University, Turkey............................................................................... 681 Santos, Ieda M. / Emirates College for Advanced Education, UAE........................................... 265, 336 Seabra, N. Miguel / University of Lisbon, Portugal........................................................................... 225 Shim, Hye Rin / Yonsei University, Korea.......................................................................................... 508 Shrestha, Prithvi N / The Open University, UK................................................................................. 881 Sitman, Rosalie / Tel Aviv University, Israel..................................................................................... 125 Slykhuis, David A. / James Madison University, USA..................................................................... 1058 Spector-Cohen, Elana / Tel Aviv University, Israel.......................................................................... 125 Storch, Sharon L / Indiana University of Pennsylvania, USA............................................................ 474



Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Tang, Jinlan / Beijing Foreign Studies University, China................................................................. 180 Tarng, Wernhuar / National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan............................................................. 840 Tedesco, Ines / Università Telematica Giustino Fortunato, Italy....................................................... 530 Tok, Zeynel Abidin / Gazi University, Turkey.................................................................................... 937 Townsend, Philip Bruce / Flinders University, Australia................................................................ 1036 Trumble, Jason / University of Central Arkansas, USA.................................................................. 1058 Tsoi, Mai Yin / Georgia Gwinnett College, USA................................................................................ 576 Ülker, Ülkü / Gazi University, Turkey................................................................................................ 937 van de Leemput, Cécile / Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium................................................... 697 Vitale, Luigi / Università degli Studi di Salerno, Italy...................................................................... 530 Wang, Sirui / Colorado State University, USA.................................................................................. 312 Watanabe, Daniel / Olympic College, USA....................................................................................... 999 Xiu, Ying / Oklahoma State University, USA..................................................................................... 489 Xu, Yan / Suzhou University of Science and Technology, China....................................................... 125 Yelken, Tuğba Yanpar / Mersin University, Turkey........................................................................... 237 Yıldırım, Gürkan / Atatürk University, Turkey................................................................................. 737 Yıldırım, Önder / Erzincan University, Turkey................................................................................. 737 Yıldırım, Soner / Middle East Technical University, Turkey............................................................. 681 Yokuş, Gürol / Mersin University, Turkey......................................................................................... 237 Yüksel, Pelin / Inonu University, Turkey........................................................................................... 681 Yusuf, M.O. / University of Ilorin, Nigeria........................................................................................ 667 Zumbach, Joerg / Paris Lodron University of Salzburg, Austria...................................................... 421

Table of Contents

Preface................................................................................................................................................. xvii

Volume I Section 1 Applications for the Classroom Chapter 1 Fusing Culturally Responsive Teaching, Place Conscious Education, and Problem-Based Learning With Mobile Technologies: Sparking Change......................................................................... 1 Nykela H. Jackson, University of Central Arkansas, USA Chapter 2 Increasing Access, Social Inclusion, and Quality Through Mobile Learning....................................... 15 Ebba Ossiannilsson, Swedish Association for Distance Education, Sweden & ICDE OER Advocacy Committee, Norway & ICDE Quality Network Europe, Norway

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Chapter 3 Promoting Virtual Collaborative Learning with the Use of Mobile Devices........................................ 32 Despo Ktoridou, University of Nicosia, Cyprus Elli Doukanari, University of Nicosia, Cyprus Chapter 4 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education: Knowledge, Skills, and Attitudes........................................................................................................... 44 José-Alberto Herrera-Bernal, Tecnologico de Monterrey, Mexico Darinka del Carmen Ramírez-Hernández, Tecnologico de Monterrey, Mexico María-Soledad Ramírez-Montoya, Tecnologico de Monterrey, Mexico Chapter 5 The Effect of Mobile Learning Approach on University Students’ Academic Success for Database Management Systems Course................................................................................................................ 68 Deniz Mertkan Gezgin, Trakya University, Turkey

 



Chapter 6 Fitness Revisited: Mobile Learning in Physical Education................................................................... 87 Angelos Dimitropoulos, American Community Schools (ACS) Athens, Greece Chapter 7 Sounding Out Science: Using Assistive Technology for Students with Learning Differences in Middle School Science Classes........................................................................................................... 101 Clement Vashkar Gomes, Columbia University, USA Felicia Moore Mensah, Columbia University, USA Chapter 8 Beyond Small Chunks: Designing Vocabulary OERs for Mobile Learning....................................... 125 Ingrid Barth, Tel Aviv University, Israel Elana Spector-Cohen, Tel Aviv University, Israel Rosalie Sitman, Tel Aviv University, Israel Guhuai Jiang, Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University, China Fang Liu, Suzhou University of Science and Technology, China Yan Xu, Suzhou University of Science and Technology, China Chapter 9 Reading in the Humanities in the Mobile Digital Age........................................................................ 146 John Fawsitt, Kibi International University, Japan

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Chapter 10 Using Mobile Technologies in Education: A New Pedagogical Approach to Promote Reading Literacy................................................................................................................................................ 156 Célio Gonçalo Cardoso Marques, Instituto Politécnico de Tomar, Portugal António Manso, Instituto Politécnico de Tomar, Portugal Ana Paula Ferreira, Agrupamento de Escolas Artur Gonçalves, Portugal Felisbela Morgado, Agrupamento de Escolas Artur Gonçalves, Portugal Chapter 11 Educational Technology Goes Mobile: Why? A Case Study of Finland............................................. 171 Antti Pirhonen, University of Jyväskylä, Finland Rebekah Rousi, University of Jyväskylä, Finland Chapter 12 Researching Mobile-Assisted English Language Learning Among Adult Distance Learners in China: Emerging Practices and Learner Perception of Teacher Role.................................................. 180 Qian Kan, The Open University, UK Jinlan Tang, Beijing Foreign Studies University, China



Chapter 13 Learners-Mobile Interaction: African Substance and Style................................................................. 210 Kushatha Kelebeng, Botswana International University of Science and Technology, Botswana Rebaone Mlalazi, Botswana International University of Science and Technology, Botswana Keorapetse Gosekwang, Botswana International University of Science and Technology, Botswana Pendukeni Phalaagae, Botswana International University of Science and Technology, Botswana Tebogo Mangwa, Botswana International University of Science and Technology, Botswana Tebogo Kebonang, Botswana International University of Science and Technology, Botswana Thotobolo Morapedi, Botswana International University of Science and Technology, Botswana Chapter 14 School in a Box in Low Resource Primary School in Mozambique: Practical Application of Zone of Proximal Development in Teacher Training with Mobile Technology........................................... 225 Linda O’Sullivan, Institute of Art, Design and Technology, Ireland N. Miguel Seabra, University of Lisbon, Portugal Section 2 Perceptions, Policies, and Design Chapter 15 The Adoption of Mobile Devices as Digital Tools for Seamless Learning......................................... 237 Gürol Yokuş, Mersin University, Turkey Tuğba Yanpar Yelken, Mersin University, Turkey

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Chapter 16 Exploring BYOD Usage in the Classroom and Policies...................................................................... 265 Ieda M. Santos, Emirates College for Advanced Education, UAE Otávio Bocheco, Instituto Federal Catarinense, Brazil Chapter 17 Universities’ Point of View to Introduce Mobile Devices in their Classrooms: Redefining Education using a Common Mobile Platform – The Journey through Implementation...................... 277 Victoria Cardullo, Auburn University, USA LeNessa L. Clark, University of South Carolina, Aiken, USA & Auburn University, USA Chapter 18 Proactive, Preventive or Indifference? Reaction Modes of Faculty towards Use of Personal Mobile Devices in Courses............................................................................................................................... 298 Alona Forkosh-Baruch, Levinsky College of Education, Israel Hagit Meishar-Tal, Holon Institute of Technology, Israel



Chapter 19 Perceived Factors Influencing Instructors’ Use of E-Textbooks in Higher Education........................ 312 Sirui Wang, Colorado State University, USA Taralynn Hartsell, Valdosta State University, USA Chapter 20 An Empirical Analysis of Mobile Learning Acceptance in Puerto Rico’s Higher Learning Institutions............................................................................................................................................ 325 Irvin Renzell Heard, University of the Cumberlands, USA Chapter 21 University Students’ Perceptions of Personal Mobile Devices in the Classroom and Policies........... 336 Ieda M. Santos, Emirates College for Advanced Education, UAE Otávio Bocheco, Federal Institute Catarinense, Brazil Chapter 22 Students’ Acceptance of Mobile Learning: An Empirical Study Based on Blackboard Mobile Learn.................................................................................................................................................... 354 Xiaoqing Li, University of Illinois at Springfield, USA Chapter 23 Students’ Perception of the Integration of Mobile Devices as Learning Tools in Pre-Primary and Primary Teacher Training Degrees...................................................................................................... 374 Blanca García Riaza, University of Salamanca, Spain Ana Iglesias Rodríguez, University of Salamanca, Spain

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Chapter 24 Designing Seamless Learning Using Role-Playing Experiences......................................................... 392 Sherry Jones, Rocky Mountain College of Art and Design, USA Kae Novak, Front Range Community College, USA Christopher Luchs, CCCOnline.org, USA Farah Bennani, CCCOnline.org, USA Chapter 25 Examining the Effectiveness of Hyperaudio Learning Environments................................................. 421 Joerg Zumbach, Paris Lodron University of Salzburg, Austria Stephanie Moser, Technical University of Munich, Germany Section 3 Phones and Apps Chapter 26 Learners and Mobile: A Reflexivity.................................................................................................... 439 Fernando de la Cruz Paragas, University of the Philippines Diliman, The Philippines



Chapter 27 Students’ Use of Mobile Technologies: Motivational Factors............................................................. 460 Hoda Baytiyeh, The American University of Beirut, Lebanon Chapter 28 Efficacy of Cell Phones Within Instructional Design: A Professor’s Perspective............................... 474 Sharon L Storch, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, USA Anna Victoria Ortiz Juarez-Paz, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, USA Chapter 29 Mobile Apps in Open Educational Resources..................................................................................... 489 Ying Xiu, Oklahoma State University, USA Jose L. Fulgencio, Oklahoma State University, USA Tutaleni I. Asino, Oklahoma State University, USA Alesha D. Baker, Oklahoma State University, USA Chapter 30 Chunk Meets Image: The Effects of Chunking and Imagery on Mobile-Based Self-Learning of English as a Foreign Language............................................................................................................ 508 Byoung Gwan Kim, Yonsei University, Korea Hye Rin Shim, Yonsei University, Korea

Volume II

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Chapter 31 Mobile Generation, Digital Devices and Preschool Education............................................................ 530 Maria Annarumma, Università degli Studi di Salerno, Italy Ines Tedesco, Università Telematica Giustino Fortunato, Italy Luigi Vitale, Università degli Studi di Salerno, Italy Chapter 32 The Educational Affordances of Mobile Instant Messaging (MIM): Results of Whatsapp® Used in Higher Education............................................................................................................................. 545 Amarolinda Zanela Klein, Unisinos, Brazil José Carlos da Silva Freitas Junior, Unisinos, Brazil Juliana Vitória Vieira Mattiello Mattiello da Silva, Unisinos, Brazil Jorge Luis Victória Barbosa, Unisinos, Brazil Lucas Baldasso, Unisinos, Brazil Chapter 33 Using Mobile Devices to Facilitate Student Questioning in a Large Undergraduate Science  Class..................................................................................................................................................... 560 Helen Crompton, Old Dominion University, USA Stephen R. Burgin, University of Arkansas, USA Declan G. De Paor, Old Dominion University, USA Kristen Gregory, Old Dominion University, USA



Chapter 34 Mobile Application Development by Students to Support Student Learning..................................... 576 Sonal Dekhane, Georgia Gwinnett College, USA Mai Yin Tsoi, Georgia Gwinnett College, USA Cynthia Johnson, Georgia Gwinnett College, USA Chapter 35 A Survey on Islamic Mobile Applications for Children...................................................................... 599 Fitria Maulida Machfud, International Islamic University Malaysia, Malaysia Murni Mahmud, International Islamic University Malaysia, Malaysia Chapter 36 Virtual Reality Using Smart-Devices in Educational Frameworks: Case Study ‑ Museum Casa Batlló.................................................................................................................................................... 629 Isidro Navarro, Universitat Ramon Llull, Spain Oriol de Reina, Universitat Ramon Llull, Spain David Fonseca, Universitat Ramon Llull, Spain Macarena Gómez, Universitat Ramon Llull, Spain Álvaro Ferrer, Universitat Ramon Llull, Spain Chapter 37 Mobile App to Support Teaching in Distance Mode at Fiji National University: Design and Evaluation............................................................................................................................................ 642 Bimal Aklesh Kumar, Fiji National University, Fiji Sailesh Chand, Fiji National University, Fiji

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Chapter 38 A New Educational Mobile Devices Platform for Social Inclusion in Tanzania................................. 656 Fredrick Japhet Mtenzi, Dublin Institute of Technology, Ireland Chapter 39 Benefits of Effective Utilization of Mobile Technologies and Inquiry-Based Teaching Methods in University of Ilorin, Nigeria................................................................................................................ 667 M.O. Yusuf, University of Ilorin, Nigeria Bolanle Idayat Lawal, University of Ilorin, Nigeria Mary Bose Oyewusi, University of Ilorin, Nigeria Section 4 Tablets Chapter 40 Motivational and Ethical Issues in Seamless Learning: Use of Tablet PCs in a Mobile and Ubiquitous Technology-Enhanced Learning Context.......................................................................... 681 Pelin Yüksel, Inonu University, Turkey Süleyman Nihat Şad, Inonu University, Turkey Soner Yıldırım, Middle East Technical University, Turkey



Chapter 41 Effects of Studying Tasks Compatibility with Tablets on Their Acceptance: How Experienced Tasks with Tablets Can Modify Perceptions of Tablets....................................................................... 697 Franck Amadieu, University of Toulouse, France Charly Pecoste, University of Toulouse, France Claudette Mariné, University of Toulouse, France Cécile van de Leemput, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium Colin Lescarret, University of Toulouse, France Chapter 42 Teaching with a Tablet PC................................................................................................................... 721 Matthew Joordens, Deakin University, Australia Chapter 43 Investigating the Status of Tablet Computers and E-Books Use of Open Education Faculty Students: A Case Study........................................................................................................................ 737 Ömer Koçak, Erzincan University, Turkey Önder Yıldırım, Erzincan University, Turkey Engin Kurşun, Atatürk University, Turkey Gürkan Yıldırım, Atatürk University, Turkey Chapter 44 Exploring Faculty and Student iPad Integration in Higher Education................................................ 752 Victoria M. Cardullo, Auburn University, USA LeNessa L. Clark, University of South Carolina, Aiken, USA & Auburn University, USA

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Chapter 45 The Parental Perspective over the Use of iPads in Primary and Middle Years of Schooling: Issues for Pedagogical and Policy Debates..................................................................................................... 773 Abdullah Ismail, Ajman University, UAE Anthony Cashin, GEMS Metropole School, UAE Chapter 46 Tablets in Primary Schools: Results of a Study for Teaching the Human Organ Systems.................. 787 Emmanuel Fokides, University of the Aegean, Greece Chapter 47 Teaching Basic Programming Concepts to Young Primary School Students Using Tablets: Results of a Pilot Project................................................................................................................................... 805 Emmanuel Fokides, University of the Aegean, Greece Chapter 48 The Use of iPad® Devices and “Apps” for ASD Students in Special Education and Speech Therapy................................................................................................................................................ 822 Johnny R. O’Connor Jr., Lamar University, USA Keonta N. Jackson, Texas A&M University, Commerce, USA



Chapter 49 Vocabulary Learning Through Picture-Viewing and Picture-Drawing on Tablets.............................. 840 Kuo-Liang Ou, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan Wernhuar Tarng, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan Yi-Ru Chen, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan Chapter 50 Multimodal Narratives and iPad in Second Language Teaching......................................................... 858 Elena Bañares-Marivela, Universidad de Alcalá, Spain Laura Rayón-Rumayor, Universidad de Alcalá, Spain Chapter 51 Investigating Students’ and Teachers’ Perceptions of Using the iPad in an Italian English as a Foreign Language Classroom.............................................................................................................. 881 Valentina Morgana, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Italy Prithvi N Shrestha, The Open University, UK Chapter 52 Instructor Perceptions and Intentions to Use a Tablet PC for Mobile Learning in a Ghanaian University: An Exploratory Case Study............................................................................................... 903 Stephen Asunka, Ghana Technology University College, Ghana Section 5 Teaching and Evaluation

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Chapter 53 E-Discovery Components of E-Teaching And M-Learning: An Overview......................................... 928 Stephen G. Nielit, National Institute of Electronics and Information Technology, India Thanuskodi S., Alagappa University, India Chapter 54 A Trend Analysis of Mobile Learning................................................................................................. 937 Serçin Karataş, Gazi University, Turkey Onur Ceran, Gazi University, Turkey Ülkü Ülker, Gazi University, Turkey Ezgi Tosik Gün, Gazi University, Turkey Nimet Özgül Ünsal Köse, Gazi University, Turkey Mustafa Kılıç, Gazi University, Turkey Gökçe Akçayır, Gazi University, Turkey Zeynel Abidin Tok, Gazi University, Turkey Chapter 55 Implementing Web-Based Learning and Teaching Using Mobile Technology................................... 966 Bolanle Adefowoke Ojokoh, Federal University of Technology, Nigeria Folasade Olubusola Isinkaye, Ekiti State University, Nigeria Olubimtan Ayo Doyeni, Federal University of Technology, Nigeria



Chapter 56 A Learning Theory Rubric for Evaluating Mobile Learning Activities.............................................. 983 David Parsons, The Mind Lab by Unitec, New Zealand Kathryn MacCallum, Eastern Institute of Technology, New Zealand Chapter 57 The ScavengAR Hunt: An Augmented Reality Teacher Training Case Study Using Mobile Devices................................................................................................................................................. 999 Daniel Watanabe, Olympic College, USA Chapter 58 Teaching Through Mobile Technology: A Reflection From High School Studies in South  Africa................................................................................................................................................. 1022 Mmaki Jantjies, University of the Western Cape, South Africa Mike Joy, University of Warwick, UK Chapter 59 Enhancing Professional Learning Through Mobile Devices for Pre-Service Teachers in Remote Communities: An Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Example.................................................... 1036 Philip Bruce Townsend, Flinders University, Australia Chapter 60 Teaching Exceptional Children With Mobile Technologies in a General Education Classroom...... 1058 Jason Trumble, University of Central Arkansas, USA Yara N. Farah, College of William and Mary, USA David A. Slykhuis, James Madison University, USA

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Index..................................................................................................................................................... xxi

xvii

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Preface

Technology in today’s globalized market continues to advance as innovative applications are emerging in a variety of professional fields. The uses for these technological enhancements are multiplying by the day as professionals and researchers are finding modern techniques of utilization. One specific aspect that has grown in prevalence are mobile devices, which have become more useful and affordable to various countries around the world. These tools have played a significant role in the evolution of multiple disciplines. A specific environment that has seen significant enhancements through the use of mobile devices is education. Teaching and learning practices in various countries are progressing due to the use of mobile technology and the benefits that come with it, including educational opportunities for students in remote locations. From higher education institutions to K-12 classrooms, portable devices are creating new paths for curriculum development, enhancing learning experience for students worldwide, and promoting accessibility in terms of both geography and learning abilities. These recent developments have led to an eruption of research and case studies that has teachers, developers, and policymakers struggling to stay up to date on the latest developments in mobile learning. In order to keep pace with the most recent discoveries and best practices of mobile devices in education, professionals and practitioners need a resource that compiles this information into an easily accessible manuscript. The everchanging landscape surrounding the diverse applications of different scientific areas can make it very challenging to stay on the forefront of innovative research trends. That is why IGI Global is pleased to offer this two-volume comprehensive reference that will empower teachers, educational software developers, instructional designers, curriculum developers, administrators, researchers, students, and practitioners with a stronger understanding of mobile devices in education. This compilation is designed to act as a single reference source on conceptual, methodological, and technical aspects and will provide insight into emerging topics including but not limited to curriculum development, educational technologies, game-based learning, and instructional design. The chapters within this publication are sure to provide readers the tools necessary for further research and discovery in their respective industries and/or fields. Mobile Devices in Education: Breakthroughs in Research and Practice is organized into five sections that provide comprehensive coverage of important topics. The sections are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Applications for the Classroom; Perceptions, Policies, and Design; Phones and Apps; Tablets; and Teaching and Evaluation. 

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Preface

The following paragraphs provide a summary of what to expect from this invaluable reference source: Section 1, “Applications for the Classroom,” opens this extensive reference source by examining the role of mobile devices within specific classroom settings. The first chapter in this section, “Exploring the Role of Mobile Learning in Global Education,” by Prof. Kijpokin Kasemsap from Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University, Thailand, analyzes the trends and applications of mobile technologies in various global learning environments. Following this chapter is “Fusing Culturally Responsive Teaching, Place Conscious Education, and Problem-Based Learning With Mobile Technologies: Sparking Change,” authored by Prof. Nykela H. Jackson from the University of Central Arkansas, USA. This chapter provides theoretical and practical analysis of the innovative impacts of using mobile technologies in problem focused learning to prepare them for critical thinking, collaboration, and creativity. Another chapter featured early in this section, “Promoting Virtual Collaborative Learning with the Use of Mobile Devices,” by Profs. Despo Ktoridou and Elli Doukanari from the University of Nicosia, Cyprus, investigates the implementation of cloud-based student-centered learning environments with the use of mobile devices. Also included within this section is the chapter “Fitness Revisited: Mobile Learning in Physical Education,” written by Prof. Angelos Dimitropoulos from American Community Schools (ACS), Athens, Greece. This chapter describes ways that students utilize physical activity using mobile learning technologies while also eliminating concerns of loss of exercise due to a focus on online alternatives. One of the closing chapters, “Learners-Mobile Interaction: African Substance and Style,” by Profs. Kushatha Kelebeng, Rebaone Mlalazi, Keorapetse Gosekwang, Pendukeni Phalaagae, Tebogo Mangwa, Tebogo Kebonang, and Thotobolo Morapedi from Botswana International University of Science and Technology, Botswana, discusses the current transformation of education in Africa with the integration of mobile technologies, as well as analyzes the future trends of mobile learning applications in Africa. Section 2, “Perceptions, Policies, and Design,” includes chapters on faculty and student perspectives on utilizing and accepting mobile devices for learning in the classroom as well as institutional policies for their use and methods for designing and implementing these devices in the classroom. The initial chapter in this section, “The Adoption of Mobile Devices as Digital Tools for Seamless Learning,” by Profs. Gürol Yokuş and Tuğba Yanpar Yelken from Mersin University, Turkey, examines students’ mobile device behaviors including their design preferences, usage frequency, and overall attitude toward mobile learning. Another noteworthy chapter, “Perceived Factors Influencing Instructors’ Use of E-Textbooks in Higher Education,” by Prof. Sirui Wang from Colorado State University, USA and Prof. Taralynn Hartsell from Valdosta State University, USA, explores the perceived attributes of using E-Textbooks in comparison to instructors’ actual use of this technology in higher education institutions. The chapter “University Students’ Perceptions of Personal Mobile Devices in the Classroom and Policies” is also found within this section. Authored by Prof. Ieda M. Santos from Emirates College for Advanced Education, UAE and Prof. Otávio Bocheco from Federal Institute Catarinense – Rio do Sul, Brazil, this chapter studies students’ views of personal device usage in the classroom and suggests policies to integrate these mobile devices in order to promote student engagement. One of the final chapters, “Designing Seamless Learning Using Role-Playing Experiences,” by Prof. Sherry Jones from Rocky Mountain College of Art and Design, USA; Prof. Kae Novak from Front Range Community College, USA; and Profs. Christopher Luchs and Farah Bennani from CCCOnline.org, USA, analyzes role-playing design in seamless mobile learning and its effect on learners’ motivation and participation. This chapter is followed by “Examining the Effectiveness of Hyperaudio Learning Environments,” by Prof. Joerg Zumbach from Paris Lodron University of Salzburg, Austria and Prof. Stephanie Moser from Technical University of Munich, Germany. This chapter presents in-depth analysis of hyperaudio learning designs and their influences on cognitive learning processes. xviii

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Preface

Section 3, “Phones and Apps,” presents coverage on various applications of smartphones and mobile phones in educational environments as well as the design of learning apps. One of the primary chapters in this section, “Mobile Apps in Open Educational Resources,” by Profs. Ying Xiu, Jose L. Fulgencio, Tutaleni I. Asino, and Alesha D. Baker from Oklahoma State University, USA, examines the role mobile applications play in expediating open-access learning initiatives. This chapter is followed by “Chunk Meets Image: The Effects of Chunking and Imagery on Mobile-Based Self-Learning of English as a Foreign Language,” by Profs. Byoung Gwan Kim and Hye Rin Shim from Yonsei University, South Korea, investigates the application of images and chunks in facilitating mobile foreign language learning. Another chapter contained within this section, “The Educational Affordances of Mobile Instant Messaging (MIM): Results of Whatsapp® Used in Higher Education,” is authored by Profs. Amarolinda Zanela Klein, José Carlos da Silva Freitas Junior, Juliana Vitória Vieira Mattiello Mattiello da Silva, Jorge Luis Victória Barbosa, and Lucas Baldasso from Unisinos, Brazil. This chapter explores the prospective uses of the popular instant messaging application, Whatsapp, in educational management and learning techniques. A concluding chapter in this section is “Virtual Reality Using Smart-Devices in Educational Frameworks: Case Study: Museum Casa Batlló,” by Profs. Isidro Navarro, Oriol de Reina, David Fonseca, Macarena Gómez, and Álvaro Ferrer from Universitat Ramon Llull, Spain. It studies the use of advanced visual technologies in order to improve the understanding of historical buildings and architectural landmarks. Another closing chapter is “A New Educational Mobile Devices Platform for Social Inclusion in Tanzania,” by Prof. Fredrick Japhet Mtenzi from Dublin Institute of Technology, Ireland. This chapter demonstrates how mobile phones are used for providing reliable and quality education to students, in developing areas of Tanzania. Section 4, “Tablets,” discusses coverage and research perspectives on developing approaches for utilizing tablets in teaching and learning methods. The first chapter in this section, “Motivational and Ethical Issues in Seamless Learning: Use of Tablet PCs in a Mobile and Ubiquitous Technology-Enhanced Learning Context,” by Profs. Pelin Yüksel and Süleyman Nihat Şad from Inonu University, Turkey and Prof. Soner Yıldırım from Middle East Technical University, Turkey, examines the effects of technologyenhanced learning environments in relation to students’ motivation and ethics when interacting with mobile devices. The chapter that follows this is “Effects of Studying Tasks Compatibility with Tablets on Their Acceptance: How Experienced Tasks with Tablets Can Modify Perceptions of Tablets,” written by Profs. Franck Amadieu, Charly Pecoste, and Claudette Mariné from the University of Toulouse, France; Prof. Cécile van de Leemput from Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium; and Colin Lescarret from the University of Toulouse, France. This chapter studies the perceived usability, usefulness, and acceptance of tablets by testing their effects on specific studying tasks used by students. Another chapter that can be found in this section is “Exploring Faculty and Student iPad Integration in Higher Education,” by Prof. Victoria M. Cardullo from Auburn University, USA and Prof. LeNessa Clark from the University of South Carolina Aiken, USA. This chapter analyzes the incorporation of iPads in a university setting and its effect on student learning. Another pivotal chapter is “The Parental Perspective over the Use of iPads in Primary and Middle Years of Schooling,” written by Prof. Abdullah Ismail from Ajman University, UAE and Prof. Anthony Cashin from GEMS Metropole School, UAE. This chapter focuses on parental and policymakers’ concerns of mobile device usage in early educational development. One of the concluding chapters in this section is “Multimodal Narratives and iPad in Second Language Teaching,” by Profs. Elena Bañares-Marivela and Laura Rayón-Rumayor from Universidad de Alcalá, Spain. This chapter features analysis on second language learning methods through the use of an iPad.

xix

Preface

Section 5, “Teaching and Evaluation,” features the latest research on practices and strategies for teaching with mobile devices as well as methods for evaluating and measuring their influence on student success. One of the primary chapters highlighted in this section, “Implementing Web-Based Learning and Teaching Using Mobile Technology,” by Prof. Bolanle Adefowoke Ojokoh from the Federal University of Technology, Nigeria; Prof. Folasade Olubusola Isinkaye from Ekiti State University, Nigeria; and Prof. Olubimtan Ayo Doyeni from the Federal University of Technology, Nigeria, explores the applications of mobile teaching technologies and practices in university environments. A chapter that follows this is “The ScavengAR Hunt: An Augmented Reality Teacher Training Case Study Using Mobile Devices,” by Prof. Daniel Watanabe from Olympic College, USA. This chapter examines the implementation of mobile applications, such as augmented reality, in teacher training exercises. Another significant chapter, “Teaching Through Mobile Technology: A Reflection From High School Studies in South Africa,” by Prof. Mmaki Jantjies from the University of the Western Cape, South Africa and Prof. Mike Joy from the University of Warwick, UK, provides a culmination of research studying the use of mobile technology within teaching and learning methods in various schools throughout the country of South Africa. The following chapter, “Enhancing Professional Learning Through Mobile Devices for Pre-Service Teachers in Remote Communities: An Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Example,” by Prof. Philip Bruce Townsend from Flinders University, Australia, discusses the concept of improving professional learning for prospective teachers in isolated areas using mobile devices. The final chapter featured in this section, “Teaching Exceptional Children With Mobile Technologies in a General Education Classroom,” by Prof. Jason Trumble from the University of Central Arkansas, USA; Prof. Yara N. Farah from the College of William and Mary, USA; and Prof. David A. Slykhuis from James Madison University, USA, examines the use of mobile technologies in teaching processes for gifted students and students with special needs.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Although the primary organization of the contents in this work is based on its five sections, offering a progression of coverage of the important concepts, methodologies, technologies, applications, social issues, and emerging trends, the reader can also identify specific contents by utilizing the extensive indexing system listed at the end.

xx

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Section 1

Applications for the Classroom

1

Chapter 1

Fusing Culturally Responsive Teaching, Place Conscious Education, and ProblemBased Learning With Mobile Technologies: Sparking Change Nykela H. Jackson University of Central Arkansas, USA

ABSTRACT

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Students must be provided meaningful learning opportunities to employ content through active learning opportunities that capitalize their interests (mobile technologies), fuse real life issues (problems that they face in school or local community), and sustain their curiosity (creative learning experiences). Using mobile technologies for culturally responsive, problem based learning is a powerful and unique way to prepare students for the four C’s: critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity. This chapter provides theoretical and practical support of the innovative impact of using mobile technologies in student selected, problem focused learning.

INTRODUCTION Throughout history, nations have experienced contentious and hostile social and/or cultural incidents (e.g., Holocaust, Apartheid, AIDS epidemic, slavery, genocide, Jim Crow law). Even today with all of the advancements in manufacturing, transportation, security, medicine, and technology, these social justice events continue to occur in the United States and around the world (e.g., racial intolerance; large populations without access to clean water, food, and medical care to cure preventable diseases; ISIS; poverty; deplorable living and working conditions). DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-1757-4.ch001

Copyright © 2020, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

 Fusing Culturally Responsive Teaching, Place Conscious Education, and Problem-Based Learning

News reports affirm that communities continually face “wicked problems,” formerly described by Rittel and Webber (1973) as the social or cultural problems that are challenging to solve due to inconsistent, conflicting, and changing factors. Challenges such as water cleanliness, air quality, climate control, agricultural issues, population migration, unemployment, poverty, violence, industries moving overseas, health concerns (e.g., Zika virus, obesity, cancer, new illnesses), and economic crisis are just a few issues that have impacted students’ communities in some way. Murgatroyd (2010) stressed that it is crucial for students to realize that change is not other people’s responsibility but an obligation for everyone. To experience this notion of accountability, students need chances to respond to both culturally relevant and place-based problems using technology resources for innovation and design to solve real problems in their local contexts. The power of technology has made information about social justice incidents accessible and readily available. Through social media and news, society has firsthand access to dig deeper, to critically analyze issues, and to create platforms for people to voice their opinions and/or raise awareness. There are numerous apps and social media options that support communication, advocacy, means for financial assistance, and activism. This technology has assisted with transforming our roles in society from one of bystander to one where we can take a more visible presence in recognizing and supporting talk around issues. Technology has made a huge impact providing learners with immediate access to information and sharing of ideas. The next step is to find more ways to use technology to solve problems and make a social impact. Integrating technology to affect social change in students’ communities and local society structures is the perfect venue to show students how to directly address social and cultural issues on a small-scale level and that can be used as a platform to tackle bigger issues. Cultivating students’ dispositions from a young age with the gift of empathy, the power of understanding, and the promotion of social action has the potential to empower positive change on a large scale. Teachers are accountable to nurture and prepare the next generation to have the necessary skills to live and work successfully in a multicultural society (Roehrig, Moore, Wang, & Park, 2012). Although academic content is extremely important, many problems that students will encounter once they graduate high school center on injustices some groups may face and will not be related to a specific content area (Duch, Groh, & Allen, 2001) or tied to scores on standardized tests. Instead, the problem-solving strategies and cross-disciplinary knowledge that students apply to real life contexts can serve as a baseline for creating innovative solutions to issues and problems. This is the work teachers now must engage in. Memorizing and regurgitating facts out of a textbook removed from the world as it exists outside of school is not an effective method of deep learning (Towler, 2014). Teachers’ goals should not be simply to encourage learners to access and understand content, but to apply what they learned by building authentic experiences encouraging them to share information with peers and community stakeholders, to investigate multiple perspectives, and to execute social action (Sharples, Kloos, Dimitriadis, Garlatti, & Specht, 2015). Students must be provided meaningful learning opportunities to use their content knowledge and to develop higher order thinking skills through active learning opportunities that capitalize on their interests -- issues around them and in their local communities. Active engagement occurs when students work on issues that they personally care about and that are relevant to what is going in their lives. In these learning situations, mobile technologies can be used as a tool for exploration and communication and as a method

 Fusing Culturally Responsive Teaching, Place Conscious Education, and Problem-Based Learning

to approach these problems through creative learning experiences. These hands-on experiences provide students with the opportunity to be actively engaged to create and to create change. Potential solutions to issues come from a collective group of engaged activists and/or a fervent individual.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Mobile Technologies and Social Action Teachers who use mobile technologies to blend culturally responsive teaching with place-conscious education and problem-based learning are creating a perfect storm for their classrooms. They are using technology to spark change and to show students how to take social action in the world. Using mobile technologies to help achieve this academic goal allows teachers and students the freedom and flexibility for deeper learning as well as moving learning into the context of students’ lives outside the classroom. Technology access can assist with the research of the issue at hand to discern facts from opinions, communicate with a group to generate point of view, and analyze the presented information to develop perspective. Teachers are expected to implement inventive practices and lessons that require engagement, exploration, explanation, extension, and evaluation (Bybee, Taylor, Gardner et al., 2006). Mobile technologies employed within a specific, local context help with achieving these goals. Intentional integration of mobile technologies used for authentic learning (used for brainstorming, collaboration, communication, inquiry, constructive feedback, access to learning resources, research, data collection, record of evidence, assessment) instead of addition (used only for research, presentations, and educational games that meet the teacher’s needs) provides students the chance to investigate issues in their local communities and develop relevant questions to solve or issues to explore. By allowing the element of choice in selecting problems to analyze and examining areas of interest, students have more autonomy and motivation to be creative and innovative (Strimmel, 2014). Through this process students construct knowledge and innovation, which are essential skills for 21st century college and career readiness (Tambouris, Panopoulou, Tarabanis et al., 2012). The skills promoted by problem-based, placed-based, and culturally responsive approaches supported by mobile technology integration allows schools to equip students for careers/jobs that do not even exist, demand proficiencies that are not fully outlined, and utilize technologies that have yet to be created (Murgatroyd, 2010). To prepare current and future mobile literacy (Pacansky-Brock, 2013), students need practice in and with 21st century learning goals. Mobile technologies enable the implementation of authentic learning that may otherwise seem problematic to implement due to classroom constraints, cost, and time (Lombardi, 2007). The purpose of this chapter is to provide theoretical and practical supports that demonstrate the importance of using mobile technologies to integrate culturally relevant teaching, place-conscious education, and problem-based learning.

THEORETICAL FOUNDATION Students learn best through active engagement, discovery, and application of concepts in real life contexts (Dewey, 1915; Vygotsky, 1978). These are the same ideas embedded in culturally responsive teaching, place-conscious education, and problem-based learning approaches to learning. Using mobile technologies for problem based learning, rooted in student generated interests or problems that are relevant to students’ environments and responsive to students’ cultures, allows for creativity and unique learning opportunities (McFalls, 2013).

3

 Fusing Culturally Responsive Teaching, Place Conscious Education, and Problem-Based Learning

Culturally responsive teaching The goal of culturally relevant teaching is for students to develop sociocultural consciousness, have opportunities to construct their own knowledge to shape their personal views, and connect learning with relevant experiences (Kea, Campbell-Whatley, & Richards, 2006). The focus is changed from the conception of information to the creation of knowledge and collective ownership. Culturally responsive teaching is a thoughtful and methodical process of attentiveness to cultural significances, concerns, and problems (Gay, 2010). In an effort to combat misconceptions, interpret and recognize different viewpoints, and inspire students to think, students are challenged to take risks to not only embrace their own beliefs but understand the value of others’ perceptions (Gay, 2002; Gay, 2010). students are encouraged to become an integral part of the learning community and decision making process through this learner-centered approach as they engage in active participation, critical thinking, and deep discussions. (Rychly & Graves, 2012). There is a misconception that culturally responsive teaching is simply adding multicultural resources (e.g., books that include underrepresented populations, posters/images that showcase the accomplishments of minorities, highlights of notable minority people (Banks, 2002). But culturally responsive teaching is so much more than simply adding a few resources into a standing curriculum. Gay (2002, 2010) emphasized that students must witness people they identify within the curriculum, see other cultural groups reflected in the curriculum, and engage with people who are different from them. Ladson-Billings (1994) outlined the following foundations: • • • • • •

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

• •

Communication of high expectations. Active teaching methods (student engagement and active participation in planning what is being studied in the curriculum). Teacher as facilitator (learner centered environment). Inclusion of culturally and linguistically diverse students and their families (addressing meaningful issues to these communities and/or including individuals and cultural issues in the classroom curriculum and experiences). Cultural sensitivity. Reshaping the curriculum (e.g., experiences to engage in social situations for learning, valuing student’s cultural knowledge, opportunities to practice cultural competence). Student controlled classroom discourse (e.g., chances for student led discussions, interest based problem solving, student choice in the direction of curriculum). Small group instruction and collaboration (Ladson-Billings, 1994).

Implementation of the fundamentals that comprise culturally responsive teaching allows students to participate in learning experiences that fit well in the context of problem-based learning. Additionally, culturally responsive teaching also dovetails nicely with the literature base describing place-conscious education.

Place-Conscious Education Culturally responsive teaching can be complemented when paired with the tenants of place-conscious education to focus instruction on experiences encountered in students’ neighborhoods, community,

 Fusing Culturally Responsive Teaching, Place Conscious Education, and Problem-Based Learning

city, or state and/or challenges of particular groups/individuals (Gruenewald, 2008; Greenwood, 2011; Murgatroyd, 2010). Using place-conscious education, students will not only see the relevance in what they are learning, but they will become more aware of cultural issues while learning to analyze and view issues from different perspectives (Gay, 2010). Place conscious education connects learning with the life of the community and with students’ lived experiences. Using this theoretical lens in the classroom to stage instruction, students get firsthand experience with recognizing local and community issues and have opportunities to impact the community through problem based learning. Students are able to use a crucial lens to link learning with the community and culture outside the school walls (Greenwood, 2011; Gruenewald, 2008). Local and community problems (e.g., social, cultural, ecological, political, economic, history, community) are investigated, empowering social action at the local level which could serve as a springboard for an even bigger impact. Fusing culturally responsive teaching and place conscious education allows students to connect real life experiences with what is happening in society. Additionally, using culturally responsive teaching practices with emphasis on social justice issues, can help students identify potential issues in their own communities and raise awareness. Students can then address issues and apply what they learned on a local, more tangible level.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Problem Based Learning Problem based learning provides students with the ideal opportunity to build critical and creative thinking skills, explore issues to identify problems, develop research questions, gather and analyze data, develop possible solutions, and disseminate this information to others (Lambros, 2002). A fusion between culturally responsive teaching and place-conscious education into problem-based approaches not only enhances the learning experience, but surpasses the last step of problem-based learning of disseminating information, to social action. This approach is transformational, taking an abstract idea and responding to it with concrete action. Problem based learning is an instructional approach that enhances learning by presenting students with authentic problems to analyze and solve (Duch, Groh, & Allen, 2001; Hung, Hwang, Lee, Wu, Vogel, Milrad, & Johansson, 2014; Lambros, 2002; Tambouris, Panopoulou, Tarabanis et al., 2012; Torp & Sage, 2002; Wattinger, Nguyen, Fornaro et al., 2006). Students work in small collaborative groups to identify “complex, real world problems” and use current knowledge and newly learned information to determine feasible solutions through investigation (Duch, Groh, & Allen, 2001; Torp & Sage, 2002; Wattinger et. al 2006). Problems are embedded in the curriculum (addressing state and national standards), connecting school content to real life experiences. Teachers serve as facilitators to coach learning through inquiry, questioning, and active participation. Through these authentic experiences students develop problem solving and self-directed learning skills (Torp & Sage, 2002). As shareholders and agents of change, students not only formulate answers but suggest resolutions for social action. Students’ move through the following criteria for problem based learning: • •

Acknowledge a relevant, open-ended problem (can be teacher selected but to be more culturallyresponsive should be student driven issues and/or learner centered action research, focused on the population and community students identify and/or community, local, and/or state issues). Investigate concerns (research and define important components).

5

 Fusing Culturally Responsive Teaching, Place Conscious Education, and Problem-Based Learning

• • • • •

Recognize multiple perspectives (e.g., discuss situations, value teammates’ viewpoints, empathize with different beliefs that challenge own feelings, accept everyone’s contributions). Empower student voice in learning (collaborative group problem statement, action steps). Launch student investigation and research (e.g., resources, collaboration, communication, speculations, active examination). Devise quality solutions (authorize multiple outcomes, supporting evidence, recommendations based on data analysis and interpretation of research, present and defend conclusions). Allocate for reflection (implement or propose social action, apply learning in a situation or personal life) (Lombardi, 2007; Northern Illinois University, n. d.).

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Mobile Technologies to Spark Change The use of mobile technologies as tools to target culturally responsive, place based problems is a fusion for change. Similar to how fusion is the source of energy to power the sun, stars, and universe, integration of mobile technologies is the fuel and spark students need to immerse in this type of learning. To effectively infuse this combination, teachers will have to embrace a learner centered pedagogy that stimulates students through creative and purposeful use of technology (Montrieux, Vanderlinde, Schellens, & De Marez, 2015). Mobile technologies (e.g., wearable devices, tablet computers, smartphones) provide portability, immediate access, and availability from anywhere (Davidson & Lazaros, 2015; Watson, 2001). Students have more flexibility to participate in learning experiences at their convenience. These perks permit students to engage in contextual learning both at school and in their community. The broad array of online resources (e.g., internet resources, databases journals, books) to retrieve information and diverse tools for communication and collaboration endorse more efficient problem-based work (Watson, 2001). Beyond research, students can use mobile technologies to discuss, deliberate, distribute, and debrief ideas/evidence with peers and the teacher instantly and from anywhere (Hung, Hwang, Lee, Wu, Vogel, Milrad, & Johansson, 2014). Mobile technologies allow teachers to combine the ideals of culturally responsive teaching, place-based consciousness, and problem based learning to tackle local/community problems and to offer students the opportunity to examine and work within real life contexts. Mobile technologies make this assimilation easier, since students have readily available support and resources to facilitate learning. Through processes encouraged by these models and through allowing student choice in selecting problems to examine, teachers can use students’ passion as an anchor to connect content and inspire students to take ownership. Investigating practical questions to make a difference in the school and/or families/community embraces these ideals and focuses students on exploring their world in an authentic way and then seeking positive change (Hung, Hwang, Lee et al., 2014). For example, history students could interview immigrants who have gone through the process to become a citizen to find out positives and shortcomings they endured. After analysis of local and national issues with immigration, students could then publish their findings and recommendations through an online documentary to improve the current process. This information could be shared with congressmen who are currently battling immigration reform at the national level. The technology tools could assist students with gathering interview/video data, research information, collaborative means, and publishing.

 Fusing Culturally Responsive Teaching, Place Conscious Education, and Problem-Based Learning

Integrating social justice projects that students are passionate about can also serve as a springboard for students to develop apps or cloud service technology to address problems. Mobile technologies can be used to immerse students in culturally relevant, authentic problem focused learning that impacts them, the needs of the community, and/or people in need (Blackburn, 2015). For example, the “Love Clean Streets” app was created and is used in some countries to report environmental issues (e.g., potholes. Graffiti, litter accumulation). Once the app is opened, the location is automatically detected. Then the user takes a photo of the problem, enters a few details, and the report is sent to the correct authority to address the issue and will keep the user updated on the progress. This app was developed in response to a problem. Parallel to the Universal Design for Learning principles (CAST, 2015) where mobile technologies are seen as a method to promote change, to engage students in their learning, and to promote social agency, this chapter promotes change from the classic approach of what students should learn (using technology for content delivery) to the focal point on why students should engage in solving the problem and how the students will apply what they learned (intentional use of technology to assist in reaching these goals) is essential: The challenges faced by communities are so substantial and the demands for the solution so demanding that we cannot assume that doing what we always do (but slightly better) will produce different results. It is time for bold, imaginative change which embraces a new view of learning as a process founded upon a different understanding of the focus of the curriculum and the nature of knowledge processes. (Murgatroyd, 2010, p. 276) The integration of mobile technology is a feasible method to assist student participation in real life contexts and a means to supporting them to recognize problems, actively collect data, and work to find solutions. Mobile technologies allow an extension outside of the classroom for more meaningful learning experiences and allow students to apply content into practice. Mobile technologies are invaluable tools and resources for inquiry, collaboration, communication, and assessment (Torp & Sage, 2002). The unique features (mobility, connectivity, flexibility, social interactivity, individuality, and immediacy) make learning goals achievable (Lan, Sung, Tan et al., 2010). Nielson and Webb (2011) highlight the advantages of using mobile technologies and how they serve as vehicles for reciprocal learning:

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

• • • • • •

Organizational tools (e.g., calendar, calculator, stopwatch, note taking, voice recording, reminder lists). Response systems (e.g., communication, collaboration, audience response and feedback through social networking). Research (e.g., social networking, hashtags, information resources, news, primary and secondary sources, YouTube, search engines). Hands on activities (e.g., exploration, inquiry, assessment, reflection, presentations). Recording evidence (e.g., pictures, video, audio, words). Assistance (e.g., support, assistive technology).

7

 Fusing Culturally Responsive Teaching, Place Conscious Education, and Problem-Based Learning

A Fusion for Change A search through peer reviewed works in the field of education and/or internet for the confluence of these terms produces limited results: problem-based learning, place conscious education, culturally responsive teaching, and mobile technologies. However, individual search results for each component highlight many documented benefits and many common themes. Additionally, the combination of any two of the search terms often yields some small subset of articles. Common terms emerge throughout these searches, such as learner centered, intrinsic motivation, collaboration, cooperative learning, active engagement, inquiry based learning, critical thinking, multiple perspectives, etc. Discussions about how all these instructional approaches foster deep learning, increase motivation, make learning relevant, and promote higher-order thinking are omnipresent. With these obvious benefits, why do all teachers and schools not approach learning this way? Transitioning to or just implementing small components of these student-centric learning approaches may require major changes in the ways schools function and deliver curriculum. Change always provokes controversy and concern. This apprehension is based on 3 C’s: coverage, control, and complications. How can teachers cover state mandated objectives? What if students do not have enough background or content knowledge to venture into a culturally responsive and/or community based problem? How can teachers ensure that students have met the required objectives through problem based learning? How can teachers have time to coordinate these efforts?

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Coverage Additionally, many teachers ask with state mandated standards and prescribed scope and sequence plans, how can teachers cover all of the standards and have time to implement culturally responsive teaching, place-conscious education, and problem-based learning? Teachers may feel that standardized tests are not designed to evaluate the type of learning goals of these constructivist approaches. Anxiety is increased over whether students will possess the knowledge they need to pass the end of year tests (Torp & Sage, 2002). While passing a test may seem important in the moment, the skills promoted by student-centric approaches described in this chapter might prove more meaningful in the long run. For example, workforce demands innovation, creativity, critical thinking, and cultural competence, which are better taught and enforced through a problem based curriculum. (Murgatroyd, 2010). Society has not aligned what they deem as “proficient” in school (measured by standardized tests) to the real-life benefits of problem based learning: critical thinking, problem solving, and integrative knowledge. To address this concern over coverage, it is essential for teachers to create problem focused lessons based on specific standards (Torp & Sage, 2002). A few examples might help illustrate how this confluence could work. For example, history class students could investigate population decline (e.g., crime, white flight, urban decay, rural flight, unemployment) in their local community/city and the reasons why people decide to leave or stay. Students can compare and contrast their local situation with population decline in other parts of the nation and/or world (e.g., Chicago, Flint). In this scenario, history, geography, technology, and reading/writing standards would be used to meet the educational objectives (Wieseman & Cadwell, 2005). The examination of this problem would spill over to migration of communities (e.g., California Gold Rush, railroad, mining, white flight, Native Americans, tourism, industry).

 Fusing Culturally Responsive Teaching, Place Conscious Education, and Problem-Based Learning

Another example that would meet specific math, science, and technology standards would be the scenario to design, fund, and create a “tiny house” village for homeless people. Where would be the best place to build this village to ensure people would have access to public transportation to travel to a job? How would the city work this rental model to pay for costs of utilities? What amenities would be offered (e.g., financial education, health care)? What are potential issues with this plan?

Control The issue of control relates to teachers feeling uncomfortable allowing student choice in the problems and learning experiences they pursue. If curriculum is student driven, how does the teacher ensure that students seek the right direction that integrates pre-set standards and intended learning outcomes? Although the teacher’s role is to facilitate this process, he/she is already overcommitted and may be challenged for time. Acknowledging student choice and interests in the problems that students explore is one of the key components. Depending on the situation, teachers may have to accept the role of a director-oriented facilitator. To assure that teams address the prescribed learning standards, the teacher may assist in planning directional goals while at the same time, guide students to find their own path to solving the problem (Lambros, 2002).

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Complications Some projects may require students to do research in the community, which could stimulate logistical concerns such as safety and coordination. In addition, some teachers may be nervous about taking the risk of implementation in their classrooms; since it is not the norm and may be viewed negatively by administration or parents (Torp & Sage, 2002). Coordination of problem-based learning requires recruitment and support from administrators, parents, extended family (e.g., retired grandparents), and community stakeholders. The amount of planning and expertise required to mentor and assist students with devising solutions for problems should be a joint effort, but does add layers of complication to the instructional design process. One solution teachers might consider is building Partnerships with nonprofit organizations, parent affiliate groups, city offices (e.g., police, medical facilities, fire department, Chamber of Commerce), and community resources (e.g., restaurants, national/state parks, local industries). These partnerships could not only offer educational backing but possibly financial support as well. But again, the teacher would have to facilitate these connections and build these partnerships.

Practical Applications In order to combat questions of coverage, control, and complications, teachers should look to resources and examples that already exist in instructional contexts. Teachers do not need to re-invent the wheel. In addition to the examples already layered into this chapter, I offer here additional examples and resources for teachers to consider. These examples illustrate four methods teachers might consider in designing student-centric learning experiences: 1. Instructional connections. 2. Community integration.

9

 Fusing Culturally Responsive Teaching, Place Conscious Education, and Problem-Based Learning

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

3. Community participation. 4. Citizen action. Instructional connections are one way to connect content to local issues and situations (Glossary of Education Reform, 2014). For example, a math teacher could use socioeconomic data in students’ city/ community to teach numerous concepts. Analysis of poverty rates, cost of living, minimum wage, and governmental assistance could be investigated. Students retrieve the public information and participate in an inquiry, web-based activity to answer specific questions about their data (e.g., average household earnings versus cost of living average, educational impact, economic impact, statistics, probability). Through the research process students gather, analyze, visualize, and explain the significance of data. To add the action piece, collaborative groups could present a proposal to the city council including congressman/representative with the analytics and possible recommendations. This communication component can be created using a number of apps or technology resources (e.g., infograph, report, video, virtual gallery walks). An extension of the previous example is a focus on financial education. Education on credit cards, managing debt, saving money, budgeting money, credit score, and high cost loans can benefit all individuals. In lower socioeconomic areas, check cashing and rent to own businesses are prevalent. Why do people cash checks at one of these businesses when they could get this same service at their bank for free? Why do people rent electronics, paying higher interest rates, when they could buy it outright? Through research and analysis, students can partner with financial experts to offer face-to-face (e.g., library, nonprofit organization, community events) and/or virtual community forums to the public. Even information on buying a vehicle (e.g., credit score affecting interest rate, invoice price, base price, sticker price, Kelly Blue Book value, rebate, financing options) could be included. Numerous types of technology can be used to help in researching and publicizing financial education. Community integration is a second way for teachers to invite local experts to serve as guest speakers and develop mentoring partnerships with students for independent research projects (Glossary of Education Reform, 2014). For example, for a history lesson on the Civil Rights movement teams could interview local community members who experienced oppression and those who did not as a result of segregated law. As part of this process, students investigate how their lives were impacted negatively and positively after integration. With guidance from the teacher, students could interview someone internationally via visual communication (e.g., Facetime, Hangout, Skype) about similar experiences in their native country (e.g., Apartheid in South Africa) to compare and contrast events. Students can analyze how what they learned relates to the social and cultural unrest happening in society/local community to suggest recommendations for change. Another social studies example is to use mobile technologies to participate in a historical journey through examination of primary resources (e.g., landmarks, cemeteries, Library of Congress, local museums) in the community. Students conduct research to determine how their community was impacted by societal events (e.g., immigration, illnesses, financial crisis, racism). Findings from these primary resources in combination with historical texts, graphs, etc. illustrate what makes the community unique. This evidence can be shared via a face-to-face or remote presentation at a community event or meeting, website, video reenactment, or handouts/brochures at the local library. Community participation is the third method to integrate culturally responsive and place-based problems. This process includes collaboration and active participation with community groups such as local organizations, nonprofit organizations, and advocacy groups (Glossary of Education Reform,

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

 Fusing Culturally Responsive Teaching, Place Conscious Education, and Problem-Based Learning

2014). For example, in science students can collaborate with local experts to determine the carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and other pollutant levels that derive from the school, local nursing home, and/or community home. Students could explore how to reduce the levels (Murgatroyd, 2010). They can also apply this research to their homes to analyze their home safety. Another science example might be investigating local environmental issues (e.g., sinkholes, flooding, water cleanliness, environmental concerns) and working with professionals in the field of environmental science to present suggestions to the City Council or another appropriate action group. Citizen action is the last and most authentic learning alternative for students. Students participate in social action, using what they learned to make a difference in the community in a meaningful way (Glossary of Education Reform, 2014). Although the previous three approaches challenge students to create products that are appreciated by others, social action empowers students to serve as agents of change. Murgatroyd (2010) provided an example of examining social isolation and loneliness of elderly. Students explore the services of their local assisted living/nursing home facility and outreach assistance. As a result, students increase social cohesion by recommending ways the community can utilize elderly individuals’ knowledge and skill. Evaluating data, argument, understanding social history, etc. are all utilized in this problem focus. Another example would be to decrease homelessness in a nearby community. With established partnerships with local psychologists, sociologists, nonprofit organizations, unemployment offices, and technical training schools, students can assist in determining viable solutions to help this population. An example is to offer technical and skills based training to individuals. Students could also design and offer financial data for a green “tiny home” community park (using SketchUp or a 3D app) that could offer a support system for former homeless people. This information could be used as supporting evidence in a grant sought by the city or nonprofit organization. There are ongoing problems that arise in local communities. Examination of School Board minutes, City Council department minutes, and local newspapers/news reports reveal the problems that teachers can use to facilitate culturally relevant, problem based learning. Analysis of what issues the community faces illustrates the “why” learning related content is important. Then the teacher has to assist in figuring out the “how” and “what” students will learn based on the problem’s focus. In addition, a web search of problem based learning examples and/or lessons reveals numerous websites that provide activities that can be adapted. Mobile technology has made collaboration (e.g., sharing information via Google Drive, social networking, online interactive books, videos), communication (e.g., chat, discussions, interviews, backchannels, visual communication, narrative recordings), and investigation/exploration (e.g., hashtag research, online polls, blogs, customizable circles, bookmarking) more attainable than ever. The teacher has to start small and intentionally integrate culturally-relevant, problem-based activities in the curriculum.

CONCLUSION The same approach to education that was used in the past is not enough to prepare students for current and future society and workforce (Duch, Groh & Allen, 2001). Students need a fluid mentality and mindset to handle the issues and complicated problems they will face, and they need tools to manage the complex decisions they will be forced to make. Using mobile technologies for culturally responsive,placeconscious, problem-based learning is a powerful and unique technique that will expose students to these these critical 21st century skills and equip them to use these skills to better their worlds.

11

 Fusing Culturally Responsive Teaching, Place Conscious Education, and Problem-Based Learning

Research confirms that problem-based learning is effective without question (Duch, Groh, & Allen, 2001; Hung, Hwang, Lee et al., 2014; Lambros, 2002; Tambouris, Panopoulou, Tarabanis et al., 2012; Torp & Sage, 2002; Wattinger, Nguyen, Fornaro et al., 2006). Students are actively involved, develop a deeper understanding of the content, learn problem solving skills, engage in techniques that teach them how to be resourceful and how to apply what they learned instead of regurgitating factual answers that can be found through a simple web search (Torp & Sage, 2002). Integrating culturally-responsiveness and place-conscious education in a problem based approach to the classroom changes the focus from contrived problems found on the internet to practical and meaningful learning experiences to which students can identify and relate. Mobile technologies support learning and enable students in all of these student-centric context to meet these goals by offering unique options to be more innovative, reflective, transparent, and creative. The abundance of mobile technology resources to help achieve project objectives may seem overwhelming and spark hesitation. However, the focus should be on why students should engage in this instructional approach and how to support them in doing this work. Technology is constantly changing, and students have a wealth of information at their fingertips. With mobile technologies, students have access to information instantly. It is up to educators to prepare students to use this massive amount of information effectively, to communicate and collaborate efficiently, and to think and problem solve in order to function successfully in current and future situations.

REFERENCES Banks, J.A. (2002). An introduction to multicultural education. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Blackburn, G. (2015). Innovative eLearning: Technology shaping contemporary problem based learning: A cross-case analysis. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 12(2), 1–17. Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., & Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins and effectiveness. Colorado Springs, CO: BSCS. CAST. (2015). About universal design for learning. Retrieved from http://www.cast.org/our-work/aboutudl.html#.VyJNNPkrLIU

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Davison, C. B., & Lazaros, E. J. (2015). Adopting mobile technology in the higher education classroom. The Journal of Technology Studies, 41(1), 30–38. Dewey, J. (1915). School and society. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Duch, B. J., Groh, S. E., & Allen, D. E. (2001). Why problem-based learning? A case study of institutional change in undergraduate education. In B. J. Duch, S. E. Groh, & D. E. Allen (Eds.), The power of problem-based learning (pp. 3–12). Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing. Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(2), 106–116. doi:10.1177/0022487102053002003 Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, & practice (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.

 Fusing Culturally Responsive Teaching, Place Conscious Education, and Problem-Based Learning

Glossary of Education Reform. (2014). Community based learning. Retrieved from http://edglossary. org/community-based-learning/ Greenwood, D. (2011). Why place matters. Environment, culture, and education. In S. Tozer, B. P. Gallegos, A. Henry, M. Greiner, & P. Groves-Price (Eds.), Handbook of research in social foundations of education (pp. 632–640). New York: Routledge. Gruenewald, D. (2008). Place-based education: Grounding culturally responsive teaching in geographical diversity. In D. Gruenewald & G. Smith (Eds.), Place-based education in the global age: Local diversity (pp. 137–153). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Hung, P., Hwang, G., Lee, Y., Wu, T., Vogel, B., Milrad, M., & Johansson, E. (2014). A problem-based ubiquitous learning approach to improving the questioning abilities of elementary school students. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 316–334. Kea, C., Campbell-Whatley, G. D., & Richards, H. V. (2006). Becoming culturally responsive educators: Rethinking education pedagogy (NCCREST Practitioner Brief H326E020003). Tempe, AZ: U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs. Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African-American Children. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Lambros, A. (2002). Problem-based learning in K-8 classrooms: A teacher’s guide to implementation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Lan, Y., Sung, Y., Tan, N., Lin, C., & Change, K. (2010). Mobile device supported problem based computational estimation instruction for elementary students. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 11(3), 55–69. Lombardi, M. (2007, May). Authentic learning for the 21st century: An overview. Retrieved from http:// net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI3009.pdf

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

McFalls, M. (2013). Integration of problem-based learning and innovative technology into a self-care course. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 77(6), 1–5. doi:10.5688/ajpe776127 PMID:23966730 Montrieux, H., Vanderlinde, R., Schellens, T., & De Marez, L. (2015). Teaching and learning with mobile technology: A qualitative explorative study about the introduction of tablet devices in secondary education. PLoS ONE, 10(12), 1–17. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0144008 PMID:26641454 Murgatroyd, S. (2010). Wicked problems and the work of the school. European Journal of Education, 45(2), 259–279. doi:10.1111/j.1465-3435.2010.01428.x Nielson, L., & Webb, W. (2011). Teaching generation text: Using cell phones to enhance learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Northern Illinois University, Faculty Development and Instructional Design Center. (n.d.). Problem-based learning. Retrieved from http://www.niu.edu/facdev/resources/guide/strategies/problem_based_learning. pdf Pacansky-Brock, M. (2013). Best practices for teaching with emerging technologies. New York: Routledge.

13

 Fusing Culturally Responsive Teaching, Place Conscious Education, and Problem-Based Learning

Rittell, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169. doi:10.1007/BF01405730 Roehrig, G. H., Moore, T. J., Wang, H., & Park, M. S. (2012). Is adding the E enough? Investigating the impact of k-12 engineering standards on the implementation of STEM integration. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 31–44. doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00112.x Rychly, L., & Graves, E. (2012). Teacher characteristics for culturally responsive pedagogy. Multicultural Perspectives, 14(1), 44–49. doi:10.1080/15210960.2012.646853 Sharples, M., Kloos, C. D., Dimitriadis, Y., Garlatti, S., & Specht, M. (2015). Mobile and accessible learning for MOOCs. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 4, 1–8. doi:10.5334/jime.ai Strimmel, G. (2014, April). Authentic education by providing a situation for student-selected problem based learning. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 8-18. Tambouris, E., Panopoulou, E., Konstantinos, T., Ryber, T., Buus, L., Peristeras, V., ... Porwol, L. (2012). Enabling problem based learning through web 2.0 technologies: PBL 2.0. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 15(4), 238–251. Torp, L., & Sage, S. (2002). Problems as possibilities: Problem based learning for K-16 education (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Towler, L. (2014, November). Deeper learning: Moving students beyond memorization. Retrieved from http://neatoday.org/2014/11/25/deeper-learning-moving-students-beyond-memorization-2/ USC. (n.d.). Using active learning in the classroom. Retrieved from http://cet.usc.edu/resources/teaching_learning/docs/Active_Learning_Florida.pdf Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Watson, G. H. (2001). Problem based learning and the three c’s of technology. In B. J. Duch, S. E. Groh, & D. E. Allen (Eds.), The power of problem-based learning (pp. 109–120). Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Wattinger, C., Nguyen, D. P., Fornaro, P., Guggisberg, M., Gyalog, T., & Burkhat, H. (2006). Problembased learning using mobile devices. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (pp. 835-839). IEEE. 10.1109/ICALT.2006.1652571 Wieseman, K. C., & Cadwell, D. (2005). Local history and problem-based learning. Social Studies and the Young Learner, 18(1), 11–14.

This research was previously published in Empowering Learners With Mobile Open-Access Learning Initiatives edited by Michael Mills and Donna Wake; pages 288-306, copyright year 2017 by Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global).

15

Chapter 2

Increasing Access, Social Inclusion, and Quality Through Mobile Learning Ebba Ossiannilsson Swedish Association for Distance Education, Sweden & ICDE OER Advocacy Committee, Norway & ICDE Quality Network Europe, Norway

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

ABSTRACT Mobile learning is part of a new learning landscape created by the availability of technologies and increasing digitization. As the use of mobile technology has increased worldwide, interest has grown in its potential for supporting flexible, accessible, and personalized education. As a result, higher education is facing a variety of challenges both now and in the coming decade (2020–2030) because of the continuing advances in technological development and digitization. Daily life, school, and work have become mobile. Moreover, the digitalized society fosters digital citizenship. Students entering higher education today have grown up using the internet and mobile devices. Universities need to offer a mix of face-to-face and online learning possibilities, such as open educational resources (OER) and massive open online courses (MOOC), which allow individuals to access education anywhere, anytime, and through any device. This article focuses on mobile learning (m-learning) in open learning educational contexts and quality enhancement in mobile learning in higher education. The article starts by defining mobile learning and the usefulness of m-learning in education, followed by some examples of mobile devices and a discussion of the principles of mobile learning. Examples of mobile learning design are then presented. Next, the advantages and uses of mobile learning in education are discussed. Because the issue of quality in e-learning and mobile learning is complex, this article focuses on course design, learning design, media design, and content. Additional dimensions of quality are security, accessibility, interactivity, flexibility, personalization, mobile devices, and their interfaces. Moreover, concepts such as personal learning and social innovation in relation to mobile learning are discussed. In the concluding section, future challenges are discussed.

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-1757-4.ch002

Copyright © 2020, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Increasing Access, Social Inclusion, and Quality Through Mobile Learning

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION Mobile learning is part of a new learning landscape created by not only the availability of technologies, smart devices and increased digitization but also the increased mobility of people. As the use of mobile technology has increased worldwide, interest has grown in its use not only in education and training but also in workplace learning. The advent of micro-learning supports flexible, accessible, and personal education (Traxler, 2007; Traxler & Kukulska-Humle, 2016). Learners of today have grown up using mobile phones and other devices, such as games consoles. The rapid uptake of mobile devices throughout the world is a major driver of its use in educational contexts. Hence, mobile learning can contribute to the global commitment to provide quality education for children, youth, and adults, as expressed in the goals of Education for All (EFA) (Mohamed & Avgoustos, 2014; UNESCO, 2015a, 2015b, 2015c). According to UNESCO (2013), mobile learning had begun to increase rapidly. Currently, there are over six billion mobile phone subscriptions worldwide, and for every person who accesses the Internet from a computer, two do so from a mobile device. Because of the ubiquitous and rapidly expanding functionality of mobile technologies, UNESCO is enthusiastic about their potential to improve and facilitate learning, particularly in communities where educational opportunities are scarce. According to UNESCO (2015a, 2015b, 2015c), mobile technologies and mobile learning can be used to achieve the following: support the United Nations’ goals of education for all, the Sustainability Goals (SDG), and SDG 4 on education; respond to the challenges in particular educational contexts; supplement and enrich formal schooling; and increase the accessibility of learning by ensuring that it is equitable, personal, and flexible for anyone at anytime, anywhere, and through any device. The key concepts of the SDG concern access, diversity, inclusiveness, equity, equality, democracy, and lifelong learning. These concepts are well aligned with the features of mobile learning and the heutagogical (i.e., self-determined) approach to learning (Hase & Kenyon, 2013). Education, particularly higher education, is challenged by the increasing digitalization of society, which now fosters digital citizenship. Daily lives, schools, and work have also become more mobile through the Internet, which is available anywhere, at any time, and on a variety of mobile devices, which also can be tailored and personalized through applications (app). This access is especially true in developing countries, where citizens are now acquiring mobile technology rather than computers, bypassing the desktop and notebook. Educators and trainers therefore have to develop learning materials for delivery on a variety of technologies, including mobile devices. Teachers have to be trained on how to design and deliver mobile learning. For these reasons, it is important to establish standards for mobile learning so that high-quality mobile learning materials are developed and that learning materials can be shared among educational organizations. In the European Union, as in the rest of the world, the number of students is predicted to rise significantly in the next decade. These students will have grown up using the Internet and mobile devices both in school and in daily life. Universities thus have to change traditional teaching methods and to offer a mix of face-to-face and online learning possibilities, such as open educational resources (OER) and massive open online courses (MOOC), which allow individuals to access education anywhere, anytime, and through any device (European Commission [EC], 2013, 2017). Unfortunately, many universities are not ready for this change. To meet these demands and challenges in Europe, the joint initiative Opening up education to boost innovation and digital skills in schools and universities was launched. This initiative is led by A Vassiliou, Commissioner for Education, Culture, Multilingualism and Youth, and N Kroes, Commission Vice-President responsible for the Digital Agenda in Europe. The initiative Opening up Education focuses on three main areas:

 Increasing Access, Social Inclusion, and Quality Through Mobile Learning

• • •

Creating opportunities for organizations, teachers and learners to innovate; Increased use of Open Educational Resources (OER), ensuring that educational materials produced with public funding are available to all; and Better ICT infrastructure and connectivity in schools. Commissioner Vassiliou stressed the following:

The education landscape is changing dramatically, from school to university and beyond: open technologybased education will soon be a “must have,” not just a “good-to-have,” for all ages. We need to do more to ensure that young people especially are equipped with the digital skills they need for their future. It’s not enough to understand how to use an app or program; we need youngsters who can create their own programs. Opening up Education is about opening minds to new learning methods so that our people are more employable, creative, innovative, and entrepreneurial. (EC, 2013a) To this statement Vice-President Kroes added:

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

My dream is to have every classroom digital by 2020. Education must be connected to real life; it cannot be a parallel universe. Young people want to use digital technology in every aspect of life. They need digital skills to get jobs. All of our schools and universities, not just some of them, must reflect that reality. (EC, 2013a) What does “opening up” education mean? Opening up education means not only bringing the digital revolution to education but also opening up a variety of new learning and educational arenas (EC, 2013a, 2013b; EC, 2017; Inamorato dos Santos, Punie, & Castaño-Muñoz, 2016). Through the Internet and digitalization, global knowledge and networking are available everywhere 24 hours a day. Distances in the world are shrinking. Information, knowledge, contact and networking with academic professionals are available anytime, anywhere, and for everyone through all kinds of devices. Because of the increased use of mobile learning, design and quality issues in mobile learning have become increasingly important in not only personal learning but also in universities. Because of the increased competition, higher education is available for everyone at any university worldwide. Thus, universities need to collaborate, but they also have to compete. New learning paradigms, such as connectivism (Siemens 2005), learning by design (Conole, 2012; Laurillard, 2012; Ponti, Bergquist, & Ossiannilsson, 2014; Ossiannilsson & Ioannides, 2017, Ossiannilsson, 2018), and teaching as a design science (Laurillard, 2012) are increasingly valued and mainstreamed in higher education contexts. Increasing the access, social inclusion, and quality of mobile learning, as well as the use of mobile technology for flexible delivery, are crucial in helping educators and trainers to develop and implement this new approach to learning. This article focuses on mobile learning in open learning educational arenas and contexts (Inamorato dos Santos et al., 2016). It also provides information that researchers can use to conduct research on the use of mobile learning in education and training. The article highlights the changes in pedagogical practices, key advantages, and challenges associated with mobile learning and its role in sustainable development, best practices, institutional responses, and future developments. It includes suggestions and recommendations for policy makers. There is an exceptionally good alignment

17

 Increasing Access, Social Inclusion, and Quality Through Mobile Learning

between the benefits of mobile learning and the goals of Education for All (UNESCO 2015a, 2015b, 2015c). However, several actions need to be taken by those who are able to influence the development of mobile learning both nationally and internationally. This introduction has described the field of mobile learning and why it needs a special focus. In the following sections, mobile learning devices, the principles of mobile learning, and mobile learning design are defined and discussed. Examples of mobile learning are provided. Issues relating to quality and policies in the field of mobile learning are then discussed. Before concluding, personalized learning, choice-based learning, and mobile learning as social innovations are considered.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

MOBILE LEARNING AND ITS DEFINITIONS The rapid development of mobile technologies has led to mobile learning (m-learning). Sharples (2000) was among the first to publish studies on m-learning, discussing the potential for new designs in personal mobile technologies that could enhance lifelong learning programs and continuing adult educational opportunities. M-learning can be defined as any form of electronically delivered learning material, particularly through Internet based technologies (Brown, 2005; UNESCO, 2013). M-learning involves the use of mobile technology, either alone or in combination with other information and communication technologies (ICT) to enable learning anytime and anywhere. M-learning utilizes mobile devices as a channel for delivering content (Jaldemark, 2013). In some cases, m-learning is seen as simply as an extension of e-learning, which can be accessed by any kind of device and at any time. Since the launch of the smartphone, mobile learning has been used for communication and social interaction. Mobile learning concerns the five Cs, which affect how mobile content and devices are used and adapted for personal learning: collaborate, communicate, create, coordinate, and curate. Mobile learning offers learning opportunities to learners without the limitations of time and space (UNESCO, 2013). The mobile devices used for mobile learning area also known as handheld devices, handheld computers, or simply “handheld” (UNESCO, 2013). Two examples of mobile devices are shown in in Figure 1. The theoretical framework of m-learning is based on the theory of constructive alignment, and its principles are based on the community of the inquiry framework. Abernathy (2001) described how the increased use of technology, such as m-learning, could affect business approaches and learning processes in the future. Current information and knowledge offerings are available on at least three devices—mobiles, tablets, computers—as well as via TV-based learning, which Kapenieks (2013) described in the eBIG3 project. This project focuses on developing new and flexible solutions that allow a learner to use a Figure 1. Examples of mobile devices: from left to right, a mobile phone and a padlet

 Increasing Access, Social Inclusion, and Quality Through Mobile Learning

single delivery channel at a particular time, depending on availability and preferences, or a combination of two or three delivery channels, which supports m-learning anywhere and anytime. Kapenieks pointed out that m-learning includes the integration of technical issues for cross-media learning content delivery, the refinement of pedagogic considerations, and the development of the shared understanding of target user learning contexts in borderless areas. The system in the eBIG3 project combines TV technology and the accessibility of mobile technology with the capacity and flexibility of broadband. Because m-learning is extremely complex, there are increasing demands for pedagogical design and development, quality enhancement, and user friendliness for this new pedagogical approach.

M-LEARNING DEVICES In designing any mobile device that supports the m-learning process in the classroom, the interface and its usability are crucial. Kukulska-Hulme (2007) argued that the successful development of m-learning is dependent on human factors in the use of new mobile and wireless technologies. Some examples of devices and their function are the iPod touch, which is a storage device with a limited screen that allows the uploading of data and one-way interaction. The iPod and tablets are also storage devices. They have big screens that facilitate reading, and they allow Wi-Fi communication. Player devices contain many apps that allow multi-interactions. MP3 players enable both listening to and downloading audio files (music, lectures, etc.), but they allow no interaction. The personal digital assistant combines computer and Internet access and allows multi-interactions. The wide screen of the e-book reader facilitates reading and searching texts but provide only one-way interaction. Finally, smartphones are also storage devices that consist of cell phone apps and access to the Internet. In addition, they are player devices that contain a variety of apps, which can be personalized. Smartphones also allow multi-interactions.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

PRINCIPLES OF M-LEARNING Mobiles are used in the learning process because they offer an all-in-one portable technology with different features. For example, mobiles can be used to take photos and video, use different kinds of media, send emails, text messages, organize calendars, store music, and access the Internet. Apps can also be downloaded, which makes these devices personal digital repositories (Rogers, 2009). Personalization is at the heart of the m-learning approach (Heik, 2013). In personalization, there are 12 principles to consider: access, metrics, cloud, transparent, play, asynchronous, self-actuated, diverse, curation, blending, always-on, and authentic. Each principle is important constitutes the value of m-learning and the need for a holistic perspective. The features are described in Figure 2, which is followed by a description of each feature. Heik (2013) defined the 12 principles as follows: •

Access: The m-learning environment comprises the access to content, peers, experts, portfolio artifacts, credible sources, and previous thinking on relevant topics. The environment can be actuated via a smartphone or iPad, laptop, or in-person. Access is constant, which in turn shifts the burden of learning onto the shoulders of the student;

19

 Increasing Access, Social Inclusion, and Quality Through Mobile Learning

Figure 2. The principles of m-learning (Heik, 2013)

• • •

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

•

•

•

Metrics: M-learning is a blend of digital and physical diverse metrics (i.e., measures). The understanding and “performance of knowledge” is available; Cloud: The cloud is the enabler of smart mobility. With access to the cloud, all data sources and project materials are constantly available, allowing for previously inaccessible levels and styles of revision and collaboration; Transparent: Transparency is the natural by-product of connectivity, mobility, and collaboration. Thinking, planning, performance, and reflection are mobile and digital; thus, they gain an immediate audience with both local and global communities through social media platforms from Twitter to Facebook and Edmodo to Instagram; Play: Play is one of the primary characteristics of authentic and progressive learning, and it is a cause and effect of an engaged mind. In an m-learning environment, learners encounter a dynamic and often unplanned set of data, domains, and collaborators, which change the tone of learning from academic and compliancy to personal and playfulness; Asynchronous: Among the most powerful principles of m-learning is asynchronous access. This removes the educational environment from the physical classroom and allows it to move anywhere and anytime, in pursuit of truly entrepreneurial learning. The asynchronous approach enables learning experiences that are increasingly personalized or choice-based, such as just in time, just enough, and just for me; Self-actuated: The asynchronous access to content, peers, and experts creates potential for selfactuation. Learners plan their topic, sequence, audience, and application via the facilitation of teachers who provide expert resources and assessments;

 Increasing Access, Social Inclusion, and Quality Through Mobile Learning

•

• • •

•

Diverse: Mobility and diversity go hand in hand. Because learning environments change constantly, fluidity becomes a norm that provides a stream of new ideas, unexpected challenges, and constant opportunities for the revision and the application of thinking. Audiences are diverse, as are the environments to and from which data are gleaned and delivered; Curation: Apps and mobile devices support curation. These technologies are designed to adapt to learners, store files, publish thinking, and connect learners, making curation a matter of process rather than ability; Blending: An m-learning environment will always represent a blending of physical movement, personal communication, and digital interaction; Always-on: Always-on learning is self-actuated, spontaneous, iterative, and recursive. There is a persistent need for information access, cognitive reflection, and interdependent function through mobile devices. It is also embedded in communities capable of intimate and natural interaction with students; Authentic: All the previous 11 principles provide authenticity in learning that is impossible to reproduce in a classroom. Ultimately, they also converge to enable experiences that are truly personalized.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

DESIGNING FOR M-LEARNING Mobile apps are closely linked with social media and social networks, thus making networking more connective and rhizomatic while allowing for multiple, non-hierarchical entry and exit points (Ossiannilsson, 2012). M-learning is becoming an integral part of K-12 education, as it is increasingly common for students to own and use portable devices. With easy-to-use touchscreen interfaces, even the youngest children can easily learn how to use a tablet or a mobile. Mobile devices are gateways to endless learning, productivity, collaboration, and sharing facilitated by the Internet. Because of their portability, large displays, and touch screens, tablets and mobiles are ideal devices for fieldwork and learning “on the go” (Jaldemark, 2013. Johnson et al., 2013, Sharples et al., 2017). Forni (2013) argued that m-learning has evolved from the questions Should we do m-learning? to How should we do [m-l]earning? In designing m-learning, the scale and context of the device must be considered. The scale of the device is an important factor in m-learning because text that is readable desktop or laptop screen can be cramped and difficult to discern on a mobile device. Moreover, designing for m-learning must focus on touch and gestures. Unlike the desktop, there can be no hovering, and the controls need to be large enough for a person’s finger to tap (Forni, 2013). Designing for m-learning also creates opportunities. For example, apps such as Rise and Clear have done away with traditional controls, and they rely on gestures in all their interactions. Therefore, it is necessary to keep these new interaction paradigms in mind in designing applications. Gestural interaction, which offers new possibilities, is needed when learners move from a desktop computer to ensure the comprehension of new content. Forni (2013) offered advice that might help learners feel productive in their m-learning, such as considering the device’s scale and context, using the least assistance principle, encouraging expansion, giving learners reasons to use other sources, and providing opportunities for collaboration and interactions among learners, experts, instructors, and so on, all of which can be valuable tools in m-learning.

21

 Increasing Access, Social Inclusion, and Quality Through Mobile Learning

ADVANTAGES OF M-LEARNING M-learning is simple, user friendly (Kukulska-Hulme, 2007), and ubiquitous. Through m-learning, the differences between formal and informal learning are blurred because learners always are connected (Creelman, Ossiannilsson, & Falk, 2014). Most people across the globe use mobile phones because the cell phone is a personal and individualized technology, and most individuals have experience with navigating the features and apps of the cellphone. According to Jonson et al. (2013), the recent advances in tablets have captured the imaginations of educators around the world. The New Media Consortium (NMC) releases annual trend reports. The use of mobile devices and mobile learning was ranked very high in the latest NMC report (Sharples et al., 2017). Moreover, the latest reports by the Open University in the UK on pedagogical innovation emphasized the advantages of the use of mobile learning, including personal learning (Ferguson et al., 2017). Tablets are increasingly used in education, because learners can seamlessly load apps and content of their choosing, which makes the tablet a portable personalized learning environment. It is clear that tablets and mobiles are not only lightweight laptops but also a completely new technology that embraces other forms of usability, such as the “bring your own device” (BYOD) movement. It is easy for students to carry and use devices to access course material, the Internet, and other resources such as social media. The choice of app personalizes the device to meet the learner’s needs. The BYOD movement has led institutions to because almost all information can be stored in the cloud (i.e., cloud computing). They may also consider whether they should continue providing computers for students and staff. Boyes (2011) stressed at least 24 different benefits of m-learning, which are shown in Table 1. UNESCO (2013, pp. 8–27) emphasized the following benefits of m-learning: • • • • • •

Expands the reach and equity of education; Facilitates personalized learning; Enables the power of anytime, anywhere learning; Provides immediate feedback and assessment; Ensures the productive use of time spent in classrooms; Builds new communities of learners;

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Table 1. Benefits of M-learning (Boyes, 2011) A means to recoup money

Better planning for face-to-face sessions

Big data tracking

Context-sensitive learning

Convenience and flexibility

Cost-effective build

Designed once

Direct interaction with learning

Easily digestible learning

Easily trackable via Wi-Fi

Easy evidence collection

Elimination of technological barriers

Encourages reflection

Fits many different learning styles

Good use of “dead” time

Promotes induction

Heightened engagement

Improved learner confidence

Improves social learning (i.e., communicating with peers and experts)

Learner control

Relevance

Speedier remediation

Supported decision making

The power of personalization

Note. The benefits are listed in alphabetic order, not in order of importance.

 Increasing Access, Social Inclusion, and Quality Through Mobile Learning

• • • • • • •

Supports situated learning; Enhances seamless learning; Bridges formal and informal learning; Minimizes educational disruption in conflict and disaster areas; Assists learners with disabilities; Maximizes cost-efficiency; Improves communication and administration.

Because of its wide range of benefits, m-learning has become the new approach to learning. Mlearning has made the learning process more flexible, and it provides the best way to access information, thus overcoming temporal and spatial dimensions, which is one of the most important reasons for using technology in learning. The interaction in m-learning provides an arena for students to share their ideas and research, to take notes, to explore and collaborate both internally and throughout the world.

M-LEARNING IN EDUCATION Through learning with mobile devices, at least five dimensions of the learning process can be improved as shown in Figure 3. Because learners use mobile phones and other devices, such as game consoles, m-learning has already been approved by learners.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Figure 3. M-learning feature sets (Gadd, 2010)

23

 Increasing Access, Social Inclusion, and Quality Through Mobile Learning

The m-learning feature sets (Gadd, 2010) shown in Figure 3 illustrate how all the five features combine to constitute a holistic approach to m-learning. Basic communications are concerned with voice and messaging communications, which are the primary reason for mobile device purchases. In most organizations, the ability to contact a person either through a phone call, an email, or a text message remains the principal reason for equipping a manager, salesperson, or field technician with a company-supplied device. Training delivery is concerned with what and how the staff working in the area can learn and acquire new skills by leveraging properly designed and formatted content on a mobile device. Common learning experiences include learning a new skill and refreshing or reclaiming forgotten knowledge. Information access means that in many cases, m-learning may not consist of assigned content but of “just-in-time” access to a variety of on-demand resources and reference materials that can be read and researched for relevant information. This set includes social networking. The best way to learn is often to connect directly with an actual expert or an entire extended learning community. Finally, content creation is concerned with easy-to-use features that are available on both basic phones and advanced smartphones; these can enable an organization’s content consumers to become content creators using their own mobile devices (Gadd, 2010).

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

QUALITY IN M-LEARNING Quality and quality enhancement are concerns, especially in higher education where there are increasing demands for new educational arenas, different and new learning paradigms with the learner in the center, a rhizomatic learning paradigm, and the increased use of technology and digitalization. However, quality should be discussed at a deeper level and to a greater extent than it has been because it concerns not only the use of technology but also the embracing of technology. The question is no longer about how to use technology for learning but how learning can take place in the digitalized daily life. Thus, the question of quality concerns how learning in digital environments can be enhanced and measured. Another dimension is that although quality used to be measured by the originator, in the new learning paradigm, which embraces personalization in learning, it is the individual who is the creator. According to Ossiannilsson (2012), quality is not only a question of assessment and control, and neither is it of any use to measure quality retrospectively. Instead, the question concerns measuring quality using a prospective approach through self-evaluation and peer-review, such as benchmarking. Defined as an internal organizational process, benchmarking is aimed to improve the organization’s performance by learning about possible improvements in its primary and/or support processes by examining these processes in other, better-performing organizations (Ossiannilsson, 2012). One interesting benchmarking model is Epprobate, the international quality label for e-learning courseware by the Learning Agency Network (LANETO) (Epprobate, 2013). Epprobate includes four main categories in addition to sub-criteria (see Table 2). The four dimensions are course design, learning design, media design, and content. The quality of e-learning and m-learning in higher education is a complex subject especially because there are many interpretations of quality and of the e-learning and m-learning concept, which is evidenced by many theories, models, and performance indicators. The question then is the following: How can the quality of material, courseware, and programs in relation to m-learning be judged? It has already been argued that the design, security, accessibility, interactivity, flexibility, and personalization of the devices and interfaces are the main dimensions of quality (Osssiannilsson, 2012; Uvali´c-Trumbi´c, S., & Sir Daniel, 2013). There can be many models of quality assurance and the enhancement of m-learning. To enhance quality, the use of benchmarking, self-evaluations, and peer reviews are recommended.

 Increasing Access, Social Inclusion, and Quality Through Mobile Learning

Table 2. The Epprobate quality label for courseware Category Course design

Learning design

Media design

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Content

Title of Criterion

Statement of Criterion

Provision of course information, learning objectives, and instructional guidance

The courseware provides learners with all the information needed, including clear and appropriate learning objectives and sufficient instructional guidance.

Constructive alignment

The learning objectives, instructional strategies, and assessment processes (provided within the courseware) are congruently aligned so that instructional strategies used can be seen to be effectively assisting learners in achieving the intended learning objectives.

Learner needs

The instructional strategies meet the learner’s needs and are matched to the learner’s profile (skill level, age group, specific constraints, etc.).

Personalization

If appropriate, the courseware allows personalization of the learning process and supports the development of learner autonomy. The courseware provides an appropriate range of instructional strategies that motivate and engage learners and support active learning (and, where appropriate, the development of critical thinking).

Instructional strategies

These instructional strategies support learning through an appropriate range of the following forms of learning: acquisition, inquiry, communication, and construction.

Interface

The utilization of media (e.g., text, pictures, audio, and video) and tools effectively enhances comprehension of the course content and empowers the implementation of instructional strategies.

Interoperability and technological standards

The courseware interface (in terms of navigation and web design) is user friendly, corresponds to current practice and allows learners to efficiently monitor their progress through the course.

Accuracy and value of content

The content is an accurate representation of the domain from a particular perspective or range of perspectives. Where appropriate, issues of values are addressed openly. The content is written so as to avoid culturally biased terms and examples.

Intellectual property rights

The courseware supplier has the right to use the materials in the courseware. Where material is provided as an OER, the rights of use and reuse are clearly stated with an appropriate Creative Commons license.

Legal compliance

The content abides by all relevant national and international legislation with reference to content, including laws related to bias, slander, and promotion of specific values.

The European Commission (2013a, 2013b) recently launched the initiative Opening up education to boost innovation and digital skills in schools and universities. In this initiative, the roles of openness, innovation, digitalization, and quality are emphasized. Similarly, large international organizations, such as the European Association of Distance Teaching Universities (EADTU), the European Foundation for quality in e-learning (EFQUEL), the International Council for Open and Distance Education (ICDE), the Organisation for European Economic Co-operation (OECD), and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), have emphasized that the roles of openness, innovation, and digitalization affect learning and educational processes. In addition to issues regarding the dimensions of quality in online learning, Uvali´c-Trumbi´c and Sir Daniel (2013, pp. 8–11) raised the following questions in their guide to quality in online learning: 1. How can instructional design, learning materials, and course presentation contribute to quality online learning? 2. How can the structure of a virtual environment facilitate quality online learning?

25

 Increasing Access, Social Inclusion, and Quality Through Mobile Learning

3. What do web design and web usability factors contribute to quality? 4. How can the use of media enhance quality in online learning? Uvalić-Trumbić and Sir Daniel (2013) argued that at least four main areas that are related to instructional design for m-learning involve key principles of quality: consistent layout and design, clear organization and presentation of information, consistent and easy-to-use navigation and aesthetically pleasing design and graphics (Uvalić-Trumbić & Sir Daniel, 2013). Sound instructional design and content should be combined. They stressed that OERs should be used and integrated into open learning designs. The quality of virtual environments, which consist of a wide range of tools, including social media, is firmly based on the pedagogical needs of the course and its learners. Furthermore, the virtual environments should be robust, solid, and reliably aligned with the technical infrastructure of the institution and its internal evaluation, and it should be updated and improved as needed. The key elements of pedagogical usability are context-specific usability, academic usability, general usability, and technical usability, which is also known as functional usability (Ossiannilsson, 2012; Uvali´c-Trumbi´c & Sir Daniel 2013). The use of media in online learning, especially if it is done intentionally throughout the technical design and not just as a supplement, can add value by increasing the variety of learning strategies and meeting multiple learning styles. The use of multimedia can increase learning experiences and improve the learner’s ability to retain information and knowledge. In summary, multimedia resources can enhance quality when they are used purposefully and as part of the course design. Because of the increase in m-learning worldwide and the huge number of educational challenges that can be addressed by the use of mobile devices, their absence in the educational process represents a missed opportunity. The world depends on connectivity and the access to information, and as mobile technologies continue to grow in functionality, their utility as an educational tool is likely to expand. UNESCO (2013) emphasized that m-learning deserves the careful consideration of policy makers. In order to realize the unique benefits of m-learning, UNESCO (2013) recommended that policy makers take the actions described in Table 3, namely, to create or update policies, train teachers, provide support and training for teachers, create and optimize educational content, and ensure gender equality for mobile students.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

PERSONALIZATION AND CHOICE-BASED LEARNING M-learning concerns self-actuated personalization (Heik, 2013) and facilitates self-directed learning with the potential for personalized instruction and student-centered learning. Additionally, flexibility in time, space, place, path, learning styles, and learning modes can be personalized, which is demanding and challenging for both learners and course providers. However, because of these features, learning can be choice-based. Both informal and formal learning take place in the learner’s interconnectedness to m-learning and learning on the go. As learning practices and technology tools change, m-learning will continue to evolve. A variety of challenges will appear, such as how learners access content and how a curriculum is defined. Heik (2013) argued that technology, such as tablets, PCs, apps, and the broadband Internet, is facilitating the shift to m-learning. However, a truly immersive m-learning environment goes beyond the tools valued by each individual learner. In addition, Heik argued, “it is only within these communities that the native context of each learner can be fully understood. Here, in these communities that are both local and

 Increasing Access, Social Inclusion, and Quality Through Mobile Learning

Table 3. UNESCO’s policy recommendations (2013)

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Policy

Policy Recommendations

Create or update policies

• “Examine the unique educational potentials and challenges offered by mobile technology and, when appropriate, incorporate these understandings into broader ICT in education policies. • Avoid blanket prohibitions of mobile devices. Universal bans, unless implemented for well-considered reasons, are blunt instruments that usually obstruct educational opportunities and inhibit innovation in teaching and learning. • Provide guidance on how new investments in technology can work in conjunction with existing educational investments and initiatives” (UNESCO, 2013, p. 29).

Train teachers

• “Prioritize the professional development of teachers. The success of mobile learning hinges on the ability of teachers to maximize the educational advantages of mobile devices. • Provide necessary technical and well as pedagogical training to teachers when introducing mobile learning solutions and opportunities. While many teachers know how to use mobile devices, many do not, and as devices grow more versatile and complex they tend to become more difficult to use. • Encourage teacher training institutes to incorporate mobile learning into their programs and curricula. • Provide opportunities for educators to share strategies for effectively integrating technology in institutions with similar resources and needs” (UNESCO, 2013, p. 31).

Provide support and training to teachers

• “Ensure that, where possible, curriculum, educational resources and lesson plans are available to teachers via mobile devices. • While many mobile learning projects make resources available to students, very few target teachers specifically. • Explore the practicability of providing professional development and teacher training via mobile technology. This approach can complement but should not replace the face-to-face training usually necessary to profoundly change teachers’ beliefs and improve their practice” (UNESCO, 2013, p. 31).

Create and optimize educational content

• “Ensure that educational resources and content, including existing online repositories, are easily accessible from mobile devices. • Support the open licensing of mobile content to facilitate its widest possible use and adaptation. This can be accomplished by supporting the use of open educational resources or OERs. • Create incentives for developers to build content specifically for mobile devices. • While it is possible to “migrate” learning materials from computers and textbooks to mobile technology, designers need to “think mobile first,” making hard choices about how to streamline content for presentation and use on devices with small screens and limited input options. • Encourage the development of platforms or software that allow classroom teachers (and others with first-hand knowledge of students) to create or tailor mobile content. • Promote the creation of mobile content that is relevant to local groups and accessible in local languages. This can be accomplished by inviting local developers to build mobile learning content for their communities. • Advocate for standards that makes mobile hardware, software and content accessible to diverse student populations, including students with disabilities” (UNESCO, 2013, p. 33).

Ensure gender equality for mobile students

• “Ameliorate existing ICT in education gender gaps by encouraging women and girls as well as men and boys to leverage mobile technology for learning. • Identify culturally relevant ways of normalizing mobile phone ownership and use for women and girls in particular. • Develop strategies to teach women and girls as well as men and boys relevant ICT skills” (UNESCO, 2013, p. 34).

digital, a “…need to know” is born, knowledge accrues incrementally, progress resonates naturally, and a full picture of each learner as a human being fully emerges…” Another dimension of personalization and choice-based learning is the use of learning analytics. Currently, learners choose learning pathways and modes. Learning analytics are used in the collection, analysis, and reporting of data about learners and their contexts for the purposes of understanding and optimizing learning and the environments in which it occurs (Ferguson, 2012; Johnson, 2013). According to Siemens et al. (2011), educational data mining encompasses both learning analytics and academic analytics. Powell and MacNeil (2012) argued that there is a broad awareness of analytics across educational

27

 Increasing Access, Social Inclusion, and Quality Through Mobile Learning

institutions for various stakeholders but that the way learning analytics are defined and implemented may vary from stakeholder to stakeholder. For example, they pointed out that individual learners can reflect on their achievements and patterns of behavior in relation to others and use these as predictors of the need for extra support and attention. Additional benefits exist for institutional administrators who must make decisions regarding marketing and recruitment or efficiency and effectiveness. Thus, through learning analytics, learning and educational offers and services can be personalized. The interfaces on the mobile devices will also be tailored by individual apps.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

SOCIAL INNOVATION M-learning, with mobile devices and learning on the move stimulate personalized learning and increases the possibilities for everyone to access knowledge, information, and learning arenas. Ossiannilsson (2013) argued that m-learning can be seen as a social innovation and as promoting social inclusion in the same way that the concept of housing for all is a social innovation. Because information and knowledge are available for anyone at any time and from everywhere, democratic processes and active citizenship can be increased. The open m-learning culture is based on the commitment and desire to learn. Moving toward open and mobile education requires rethinking educational issues, which demands a changed mindset and/or paradigm shift regarding learning, educational design, infrastructure, organization, and quality (Ossiannilsson, 2013; Ossiannilsson & Ioannides, 2017). Open education affects many aspects of society, such as educational quality, social innovation, competitiveness, democracy, globalization, sustainability, and visibility. Because technological innovations are seen as one of the strongest driving forces of transformation in education and society, one of the most fruitful ways forward may be to involve students as change agents in the move toward increased digitalization and open, mobile education. Mobile open learning can be seen as a social innovation because it stimulates and promotes personalized learning and choice-based learning possibilities. According to Murray, Calulier-Grice, and Mulgan (2010), social innovations are new ideas (i.e., products, services, and models) that simultaneously meet social needs and create new social relationships or collaborations. These solutions are social in their ends and in their means. They can take the form of genuine innovations or of improved solutions. In some parts of Europe, the term social innovation refers to what the European Commission has called “workplace innovation.” The agents of social innovation are people, society, responsibility, change, needs, and development. In m-learning, the learner takes control of where to study, what to study, and how to study in terms of time, mode, and space. Innovation is usually described as referring to successful new products, services, and processes for business and society. M-learning provides an entirely new way of thinking about learning and education and related issues of quality. M-learning also means that existing traditional educational structures must be examined critically. Is the so-called traditional campus education, which is usually linearly organized to achieve one input and one output, really sustainable in the modern global society? It may be that a rhizomatic paradigm based on the benefits of m-learning is more suitable and sustainable (Ossiannilsson, 2013; Ossiannilsson & Ioannides, 2017).

 Increasing Access, Social Inclusion, and Quality Through Mobile Learning

CHALLENGES AND CONCLUSION The potential for m-learning resembles a technical and pedagogical explosion in learning and educational arenas. Despite the ubiquity of mobile phones, the access to them is not equitable (e.g., ownership versus access, types of handsets, usage abilities based on affordability, etc.), and their small screen and keyboards can be problematic, which must be considered in their use and accessibility by disabled users. Some of the main challenges are the design, accessibility, interactivity, flexibility, personalization, and transparency of m-learning, which have been deemed dimensions of quality in technology enhanced learning (TEL) or e-learning. Such demands may be even stronger in m-learning, especially in cases of system failure when learners would be extremely disadvantaged. There are increasing demands for m-learning by users, but there are also challenges for course providers and institutions to develop course content and material that can be accessed on a range of mobile devices. Furthermore, m-learning requires designing for the “here and now” and “just-in-time” learning possibilities. With the use of open content, such as OERs, the use and reuse of materials and peer review functionalities are necessary. The design of m-learning also requires adequate and user-friendly sharing possibilities. Other challenges are the use of social media, such as Facebook, Twitter, blogs, other media, and apps, and their support on mobile devices. Perhaps most importantly, m-learning promotes self-actuated personalization. Mobile learning will continue to evolve as learning practices and technology tools change. The several challenges to its implementation include how learners access content and how a curriculum is defined. Technology, the huge range of devices, and the broadband Internet are drivers in the shift to m-learning, which requires compatible learning designs, accessibility, flexibility, personalization, interactivity, and communication. Online communities for learning should be built using free and easily accessible systems. A critical challenge is that while mobile learning environments must extend beyond individuals and their communities, the cultural context of each learner can be fully understood only within such communities.

REFERENCES Abernathy, D. J. (2001). Get ready for m-learning. Training & Development, 55(2).

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Adams-Becker, S., Cummins, M., Davis, A., Freeman, A., Hall-Giesinger, C., & Ananthanarayanan, V. (2017). NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Higher Education Edition. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium. Boyes, M. (2011). 24 Benefits of M-learning. E-learning Network Insides. Retrieved from http://insights. elearningnetwork.org/?p=507 Brown, H. T. (2005). Towards a model for M-learning in Africa. International Journal on E-Learning, (4): 299–315. Conole, G. (2012). Designing for learning in an open world. Springer Link. Creelman, A., & Ossiannilsson, E. (2014). Bildning och gränslöst lärande. Om att tänja gränser. [Bildung and boundless learning: About stretching borders] In E. Dunkels & S. Lindgren (Eds.), Interaktiva medier och lärande [Interactive media and learning]. Malmö: Gleerups.

29

 Increasing Access, Social Inclusion, and Quality Through Mobile Learning

Epprobate. (2013). Epprobate, the international quality label for e-learning courseware. Retrieved from http://www.epprobate.com/index.php/en European Commission. (2013a). Commission launches “Opening up Education” to boost innovation and digital skills in schools and universities. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/education/news/doc/ openingcom_en.pdf European Commission. (2013b). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee, and the Committee of the Regions, European Commission 654 final. Opening up education: Innovative teaching and learning for all through new technologies and open educational resources. Brussels: European Commission. Ferguson, R. (2012). The state of learning analytics in 2012: A review and future challenges [Technical report]. Knowledge Media Institute: The Open University, UK. Retrieved from http://kmi.open.ac.uk/ publications/pdf/kmi-12-01.pdf Ferguson, R., Barzilai, S., Ben-Zvi, D., Chinn, C. A., Herodotou, C., Hod, Y., ... Whitelock, D. (2017). Innovating pedagogy 2017: Open University innovation report 6. UK: Milton Keynes: The Open University. Forni, K. (2013). 158 tips on mLearning: From planning to implementation. Santa Rosa, California: The eLearning Guild. Gadd, R. (2010, October 31). Re: M-learning trends. [blog comment]. Retrieved from http://mlearningtrends.blogspot.com/2010/10/mlearning-feature-sets-possibilities.html Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (Eds.). (2013). Self-determined learning: Heutagogy in action. New York: Bloomsbury. Heick, T. (2013). 12 principles of m-learning. Retrieved from http://www.teachthought.com/technology/12principles-of-mobile-learning/ Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Estrada, V., Freeman, A., & Ludgate, H. (2013). NMC horizon report: 2013 higher education edition. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2007). Mobile usability in educational contexts: What have we learnt? The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 8(2). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl. org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/356 Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. Oxford: Routledge. Murray, R., Calulier-Grice, J., & Mulgan, G. (2010). Open book of social innovation. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/innovation/policy/social-innovation/index_en.htm Ossiannilsson, E. (2012). Benchmarking e-learning in higher education. Lessons learned from international projects. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Oulu University, Finland. Ossiannilsson, E. (2013). Social innovation: A question of MOOCs. European Association for International Education, EAIE Spring Forum. In Discussing International Education (pp. 28-31).

 Increasing Access, Social Inclusion, and Quality Through Mobile Learning

Ossiannilsson, E., & Ionnaides, N. (2017). Towards a framework and learning methodology for innovative mobile learning: A theoretical approach. In J. Keengwee (Ed.), Handbook of research in digital content, mobile learning and technology integrated models in teacher education. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.1145/3136907.3136929 Ponti, M., Berqquist, M., & Ossiannilsson, E. (in press). Learning across sites through learning by design in use. In A. Littlejohn & C. Pegler (Eds.), Reusing open resources: Learning using open, networked resources. Oxford: Routledge. Powell, S., & MacNeil, S. (2012). Institutional readiness for analytics: A briefing paper. JISC CETIS. Retrieved from http://publications.cetis.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Institutional-Readiness-forAnalytics-Vol1-No8.pdf Rogers, K. D. (2011). Mobile learning devices: Essentials for principals. Bloomington: Solution Trees. Sharples, M. (2000). The design of personal mobile technologies for lifelong learning. Computers & Education, 34(3–4), 177–193. doi:10.1016/S0360-1315(99)00044-5 Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning, 2(1). Siemens, G., Gasevic, D., Haythornthwaite, C., Dawson, S., Shum, S. B., Ferguson, R., . . . Baker, R. S. (2011). Open learning analytics: An integrated & modularized platform. Retrieved from http://etec.ctlt. ubc.ca/510wiki/Learning_Analytics:_An_Introduction_and_Critical_Analysis Traxler, J. (2007). Defining, discussing and evaluating mobile learning: The moving finger writes and having writ… The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 8(2). Traxler, J., & Kukulska-Hulme, A. (Eds.). (2016). Mobile learning: The next generation. London, UK: Routledge. UNESCO. (2013). Policy guidelines for M-learning. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ images/0021/002196/219641e.pdf

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Uvali’c-Trumbi’c, S., & Sir Daniel, J. (2013). A guide to quality in online learning. Mountain View, CA: Academic Partnerships.

This research was previously published in the International Journal of Advanced Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (IJAPUC), 10(4); edited by Tao Gao; pages 29-44, copyright year 2018 by IGI Publishing (an imprint of IGI Global).

31

32

Chapter 3

Promoting Virtual Collaborative Learning with the Use of Mobile Devices Despo Ktoridou University of Nicosia, Cyprus Elli Doukanari University of Nicosia, Cyprus

ABSTRACT

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

With the ubiquity and rapidly expanding functionality of mobile technologies, educational institutions have the potential to improve and facilitate learning. More and more educators are employing communication, collaboration and sharing tools and resources to make learning more accessible, equitable, personalized and flexible for students everywhere. This study investigates the implementation of Cloud-Based Student-Centered Learning (CBSCL) environment with the use of mobile devices in an MIS course. For the purpose of the study, the data were elicited through students’ focus groups and the lecturer’s notes on CBSCL as a virtual learning environment. The data were examined based on content analysis. The results indicate that CBSCL can be a challenging collaborative learning experience and a motivating approach to teaching and learning; consequently, the students become responsible for their own learning and problem solving process.

INTRODUCTION Eteokleous and Ktoridou (2011) state that the shift towards a technology-oriented, interconnected and complex environment, enables students to work together, socialize and learn more effectively. Therefore, educators are continuously seeking ways to bring current technological advances into the classroom. Academic institutions could take advantage of technology advancements to successfully balance their infrastructure and technology resources in order to teach students with the advanced technology they really need. A way to shift from the traditional Teacher-Centered Learning (TCL) to a Student-Centered DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-1757-4.ch003

Copyright © 2020, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Promoting Virtual Collaborative Learning with the Use of Mobile Devices

Learning (SCL) environment is the use of Cloud Applications (Ktoridou, Eteokleous, & Dionysiou, 2013). SCL environments aim to develop a range of higher-order skills and expose students to processes that help them take responsibility for their own learning. Thus, they become active participants in the learning process. In addition, if SCL is implemented in a cloud-based learning environment using mobile devices, it could be a strong motivation tool to promote classroom involvement and participation. This chapter explores the development of a Cloud-based Student-Centered Learning (CBSCL) environment with students accessing the educational material and communicating through the use of their mobile devices. The study examines how Google Applications for Education are implemented in the required undergraduate MIS-151 Business Software Applications course, offered at the University of Nicosia. More specifically, the study examines how students communicate, collaborate and learn through a CBSCL environment by using their mobile devices. The following issues are taken into consideration: students’ and educator’s roles; their involvement in the teaching and learning process; students’ views on mobile devices utilization in CBSCL; knowledge acquisition; and higher order skills development. For the purpose of the study, the authors employ a qualitative approach as a methodology based on content analysis. Students’ views expressed through focus groups, and the lecturer’s written notes on CBSCL based on her online and in-class observations, serve as data.

BACKGROUND

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Web 2.0 Technologies for Education The evolution of the Web started with Web 1.0, the so-called Static Web, where users could only read online-posted information. In 1999, the lack of active interaction among common users of the web, led to the birth of Web 2.0– the Read-Write-Publish era. Web 2.0– the dynamic, writing and participating Web– encourages and enables educators and learners to share ideas and collaborate in innovative ways. Educators are now forced to re-evaluate their teaching and learning methods in order to transform education practices into more active and meaningful forms of learning that involve “learning to be” and “learning about” (An, Aworuwa, Ballard & Williams, 2009). The writing and participating characteristics of Web 2.0 offer opportunities to create more interactive and powerful learning environments in which learners become knowledge creators, producers, editors, and evaluators (Richardson, 2009). Web 2.0 involves various new forms of online communication: between two or more people; between two or more online services; and between individual users and software applications. Such services and applications are blogs, wikis, content syndication, multimedia sharing services, podcasting and content tagging service. Web 2.0 allows users to access and add content, leave messages with comments and exchange digital media. The aforementioned services and applications provide new opportunities and change the role of the user (learner) transforming social networking into educational networking. As Eteokleous and Ktoridou (2011) report, the Web 2.0 tools can be applied for teaching and learning purposes towards achieving educational objectives. Many researchers have predicted that Web 2.0 will change the education of the 21st century dramatically. That is, it will alter the ways in which teachers and students interact, communicate and learn from each other. Therefore, new approaches to teaching and learning will emerge (Ala-Mutka, Punie, & Ferrari, 2009; Hargadon, 2009; Murugesan, 2009; Richardson, 2009). Several companies are continuously

33

 Promoting Virtual Collaborative Learning with the Use of Mobile Devices

working on the development and promotion of new tools, services and applications, with some of them providing educational editions. Google is one of these companies, offering Cloud Applications for Education with independently customizable versions of several products under a custom domain name.

Cloud Computing Worldwide, educational institutions have become highly dependent on information technology in order to serve their business requirements. The maintenance of a wide range of hardware and software requires continuous investment and considerable skills for their support. Mainly the economies of scale and the numerous features of cloud computing will lead to an increasing shift from services hosted within an institution towards services hosted on cloud for ubiquitous utilization. These services are offered free of charge for educational institutions and are accessed through internet enabled devices. A report from UNESCO (2010) reveals that, in the near future, the majority of educational services are expected to be hosted on cloud. That is, institutions will host their private data centers on cloud, having: remote data centers, resources pooling, infinite scalability, pay per use, and self-service. Educational institutions have begun with the most standardized service; i.e. outsourcing students’ email. Google and Microsoft are the most popular free-email and applications providers for the educational sector in many countries (Sclatter, 2010). In particular, Google Apps for Education edition include: Gmail, Drive, Dogs, Calendar, Sheets, Sides and Vault. Microsoft Live@edu offers communication tools such as: instant messaging, contact management, and calendar software.

Google Apps for Education

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

The SCL method, when applied using current technology tools and resources, can become an even more prominent and important pedagogy. Google Applications can promote a purposeful communication, collaboration, and sharing environment, offering students and educators the technology they really need. More specifically, Google applications for education can provide a set of customizable tools that can facilitate communication and collaboration among faculty, staff and students. These tools, when incorporated within the teaching and learning process, can enhance and individualize teaching and learning. According to Wolf (2010), the existing tools can be categorized in regard to three areas: • • •

Communication: Hosted email, shared calendars, and integrated video chat; Collaboration: Students and teachers can share documents online at any time and location via Google Docs and Google sites; Customization: IT systems can be easily integrated with Google.

The educational value of Google Applications has been emphasized in the authors’ previous research work. According to Ktoridou and Doukanari (2016), Google Applications in combination with the Challenged-Based Learning (ChBL) method serves as a motivating and engaging approach that encourages multidisciplinary group collaboration. Ktoridou, Doukanari, & Epaminonda (2016) report that, since working students have time restrictions and are therefore unable to attend face-to-face classes, the use of Cloud computing as an e-learning platform enables them to communicate, collaborate and share learning experiences anytime, anywhere and contributes to interdisciplinary learning. This chapter explores the implementation of a CBSCL environment through mobile devices in an MIS course.

 Promoting Virtual Collaborative Learning with the Use of Mobile Devices

Mobile Learning Mobile learning involves the use of mobile devices to support teaching and learning (United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2012). Due to the features and functionality of mobile devices, which provide more support to learners, the term “Mobile” distinguishes “Mobile Learning” from other types of learning. For example, lecture presentations can be easily downloaded if the learner has a handheld device. The learning space can be anywhere. A wide range of mobile devices are available in the market today: smartphones, featured phones, tablets, laptops, PDAs, and eBook readers. Mobile devices and especially smartphones, are multi-function devices with internet connectivity, offering further potential opportunities to support teaching and learning (JISC, 2014). What makes mobile learning exciting is the combination of features, functionality and ability to ubiquitously connect to the internet and have access to applications. Therefore, being a mobile device user and having access to learning material through cloud apps, could offer learners great learning experiences.

SCL: Student Centered Learning During the last few decades, education literature presents a broad variety of SCL methods and provides evidence that an SCL approach, if properly implemented, could lead to increased motivation with more positive attitudes on the part of the students towards their learning and the subject under study; deeper understanding; and greater retention of knowledge (Bonwell, & Eison, 1991; Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 1991; McKeachie, 1986; Meyers, & Jones, 1993). Academics and practitioners are continuously seeking ways to enhance and enrich teaching and learning processes and increase students’ motivation. The authors of this work have integrated a CBSCL environment with the use of mobile devices and implemented it in a required course (MIS-151 Business Software Applications). The implementation of such a combination aims for students to

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

• • • • •

Become responsible for their own learning; Have deeper understanding, and greater retention of knowledge; Develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills; Be able to communicate, collaborate and share in a cloud environment; Form positive attitudes toward the subject.

MIS-151 Business Software Applications Course Course Description MIS-151 Business Software Applications is a required undergraduate computer lab course, offered to students in Business Administration, Management, and Management Information Systems (MIS), during fall, spring, and summer semesters. The course does not require any prerequisites. The curriculum is designed based on SCL, used as the organizing principle of teaching and assessment practice, and comprises both lectures and discussions. The objectives of the course are the following:

35

 Promoting Virtual Collaborative Learning with the Use of Mobile Devices

• • • • •

Introduce the fundamental concepts of Business Information Technology components: Computer Systems, Telecommunications and Networks, and the Internet; Identify business problems calling for the implementation of software applications (MS-Office 2010, Google Applications); Introduce the basic web technologies that support business applications; Explore the challenges in bringing businesses on the web (Web 2.0, Cloud Computing, M-Computing, Social Networking, User Generated Content); Examine issues of business data resource management.

Assignments The course has the following assessment method: Test - 20%, Project 1- 15%, Project 2- 15% Homework/ Discussion Questions - 10%, Final Exam - 40%. Student active participation and contribution to class discussions is of major importance for the overall grading assessment and is mainly based on the quality of the students’ arguments/answers/presentations/discussions.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

TEACHING METHODOLOGY The teaching methodology implemented in the MIS-151 Business Software Applications course was the integration of CBSCL environment with the utilization of mobile devices. The aim of this combination was to promote the development of a virtual collaborative environment. The students were encouraged to put into use the technology they were using in their daily lives for their education and become responsible for their own learning. Eight sections of MIS-151 were offered from spring 2013 to fall 2016, with 190 students attending (approximately 24 in each lab). The students met twice a week in sessions of 75 minutes each. Groups of 5-6 students were formulated aiming at better communication, collaboration and sharing of the learning material. The students had to investigate a given issue/topic/problem individually and then meet with their team members to brainstorm and discuss their findings in order to come up with a shared conclusion. Finally, they had to develop an 8-10 slide presentation of their findings and present it in class. The students used their mobile devices (e.g. smartphone, tablet, i-pad) to access and share the learning material; communicate through hosted email and integrated-video chat; and collaborate and share via Google Docs and Google sites. During group discussions, the lecturer observed the students’ group work concentrating on their increased motivation towards learning; attitudes towards the subject; active involvement in the communication and collaboration processes; and finally the development of problem solving skills. Mainly students were responsible for their own learning. The lecturer was involved as a facilitator during the whole learning process. As mentioned above, the students were evaluated based on a test, two projects, homework (e.g. case study analysis, academic paper discussions, in-class and virtual exercises, presentations). The students’ overall learning process and outcomes were evaluated based on clarity, role responsibilities towards the smooth operation of the group, design of presentations, timing, style of delivery and ability to answer questions.

 Promoting Virtual Collaborative Learning with the Use of Mobile Devices

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY For the purpose of this study, the data were elicited through students’ focus groups and the lecturer’s notes on CBSCL as a virtual learning environment, based on her online and in-class observations. The data were examined by employing a content analysis.

Focus Groups At the end of each semester, two focus groups from each section consisting of 8 to 10 students (total sixteen focus groups) were organized. The focus groups were conducted in order to obtain information from students’ insights (views, experiences, and perceptions) and to in-depth analyze (Sclatter, 2010) the educational outcome of CBSCL as a virtual learning environment integrated with the use of mobile devices. Student-participants for each focus group were chosen based on a number of criteria such as age, gender and specialization. These criteria were chosen in order to have diversity in the groups. On average, the duration of each focus group was between sixty to ninety minutes. Open-ended questions were also used in order to encourage students to express their views and reflect on their experiences freely.

Lecturer’s Online and In-Class Observations The lecturer’s written notes based on her online and in-class observations and experiences were analyzed. The purpose was to elicit information about her views on the design, development, implementation, observations and experiences on CBSCL practices and to examine whether the students’ educational goals had been met.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

ANALYSIS AND RESULTS Content analysis of the data reveals that the employment of CBSCL educational practice by using mobile devices is beneficial in terms of meeting the students’ educational goals. The analysis below, first presents students’ impressions of CBSCL. The students’ views indicate that this environment is a highly motivating and challenging virtual environment for group collaboration. The students believe that they have become responsible for their own learning and have been encouraged to employ the technology used in their everyday lives for educational purposes. Finally, they recommend further implementation of CBSCL in other courses. Then, analysis of the lecturer’s notes (based on her online and in-class observations and experiences) follows, which also reveals that CBSCL is a challenging and beneficial experience.

Students’ Views CBSCL With the Use of Mobile Devices: A Highly Motivating and Challenging Virtual Learning Environment for Group Collaboration The students believe that CBSCL with the use of their mobile devices is an exciting new learning experience. The students’ comments below clearly indicate that, this virtual learning environment has been

37

 Promoting Virtual Collaborative Learning with the Use of Mobile Devices

highly motivating and challenging, particularly since they have been able to communicate, collaborate and share ideas ubiquitously through their mobile devices: I enjoyed collaborating online with my group at my own pace, using my tablet. I feel I could express and share my ideas easier. I was on vacation and I could easily work on a group project from my smartphone. It is overwhelming! It was quite interesting and challenging for me to explore assessment topics through a group investigation using my smartphone, regardless of my physical position. My smartphone is actually the best tool not only for my personal interactions, but also for my group assignments.

Students Becoming Responsible for Their Own Learning Students also seemed motivated and excited about being given the opportunity to investigate and study the course topics individually and then share their findings with their group members by using the latest trends of technology; thus, taking initiatives and becoming responsible towards their own learning: After I was given the assignment, I felt the responsibility to work for it and come up with some findings. Moreover, I needed to present my findings to my group members. I really appreciate the freedom of learning by using my technology. One of the assignments we were given by the lecturer was to find ways to promote a small business. As a website designer, I took the initiative to propose my idea about our “Business Go Online” to the group. I became the group leader, taking the responsibility to lead the project of designing a prototype.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Furthermore, as stated by a student, becoming responsible for one’s own learning through online collaboration and communication with peers, leads to deeper understanding of a given subject. With CBSCL, I felt more responsible for my learning; it was a very pleasant learning for me. In addition, the online communication and collaboration with my peers offered me opportunities to develop a deeper understanding of the topic that was assigned to our group.

Students Employing the Technology Used in Their Everyday Lives for Educational Purposes Significant comments from students who are keen users of mobile devices indicate that, CBSCL has proven to be the right medium for them to employ the technology they use in their everyday lives for educational purposes:

 Promoting Virtual Collaborative Learning with the Use of Mobile Devices

I never thought that my knowledge on i-phone features would help me do my homework at the university. Through this experience, I realize the significance of utilizing smartphones in a business context. I am an android user for the past three years now; having a specific group assignment on ways to mobilize a business, I discovered challenges I could never imagine. CBSCL in MIS-151 course urged me not only to seek for a solution to a given problem, but to investigate using my technology at my own convenience. In addition, as the following student’s comment reveals, the CBSCL environment has contributed to knowledge retention: I was never good with Technology; CBSCL not only motivated me towards learning, but I feel that I have greatly retained the information and understood better the significance of technology applications in Business.

CBSCL Challenges Challenges some students faced were related to issues regarding the required versions in order to access cloud applications and learning material through their mobile devices. For example, a student who did not have the necessary knowledge and skills to download the mobile versions for the Apps stated that Getting the Mobile version for Google’s Apps was a bit difficult for me and my sister; we study together in the same class. With the help of our experienced group members, we managed to overcome our difficulties and now we feel much more confident. The important point made in this statement is that through group collaboration in this type of studentcentered environment, students can learn from each other and eventually overcome possible difficulties they may face.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Students’ Recommendations for Further CBSCL Implementation Recommendations were made by all students for further implementation of CBSCL virtual approach in other courses. Many students made strong comments on the significance of mobile devices usage: CBSCL should be incorporated in more courses so as we can work in a collaborative cloud environment using our mobile phones. It is the best way to retain knowledge, become more responsible for our learning and work at our own pace from anywhere. Cloud Applications is a motivating learning environment and could be used for every course at the University of Nicosia. In sum, the results emerging from students’ views indicate that CBSCL has challenged and highly motivated students towards learning. The use of this method, integrated with mobile devices, has of-

39

 Promoting Virtual Collaborative Learning with the Use of Mobile Devices

fered students the appropriate virtual environment to enhance their experiences, knowledge retention and deeper understanding of a given subject in a more fun and innovative way. In addition, it has enabled the students to share knowledge and experience and to become responsible for their own learning.

Lecturer’s Notes Based on Online and In-Class Observations: CBSCL Challenges and Benefits Important notes from the lecturer on the implementation of such a learning approach revealed challenges as well as benefits. In her initial observations, the lecturer notes down that the CBSCL is a time-consuming process; thus, a challenging experience for the lecturer: It is time consuming to adjust the curriculum to teach in a CBSCL environment (teach beyond course content). Moreover, it needs a lot of effort to create accounts on Google Apps for all students, manage the groups, upload course material, and share the material. In addition to being challenging for the lecturer, this virtual approach to learning has also been challenging for the students. As it is elicited from the lecturer’s note below, the CBSCL as a new learning experience has initially required some effort on the part of the students, who have been used to the traditional in class teacher-centered learning model. That is, students initially lack the concept of online communication, collaboration and sharing. They face difficulties working individually and are unable to leverage the technology they use in their daily lives for educational purposes. However, the lecturer also observes that, the ubiquitous character of the CBSCL method motivates students to become more self-confident, communicate, and collaborate with their peers in order to find a common solution to a given problem.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Even though students initially felt that they could not work alone and did not have the knowledge to utilize cloud apps, CBSCL eventually encouraged them to leverage the technology they use in their daily lives in a collaborative environment, and finally led them to come up with excellent ideas and solutions. Throughout her notes, the lecturer repeatedly reports that, as she was observing students’ online activities (communication/collaboration/sharing), she found CBSCL quite constructive and beneficial. That is, although students were coming from different specializations, they managed to collaborate better and share their experiences on topics related to technology innovations applied to businesses, as the following note from the lecturer precisely shows: Even though in the current course students come from different majors, they seem to share similar ideas, come-up with good solutions, and their arguments and discussions are very constructive… By monitoring students’ discussions, I notice that regardless of the diversity in their major of study, they seem motivated in seeking solutions to problems and challenges using their existing knowledge and skills. The lecturer further explains that,

 Promoting Virtual Collaborative Learning with the Use of Mobile Devices

During a discussion on the latest battery failure of Samsung Note 7, all students agreed on the causes of this failure (e.g. insufficient testing), expressed similar concerns on human safety and suggested various strategic actions that Samsung should take in order to compensate its customers. The lecturer also attributes the motivational aspect of the CBSCL environment to the fact that it enables people to communicate and collaborate ubiquitously: The ubiquitous student-student and student-lecturer communication and collaboration through mobile devices, is an excellent motivation for both sides. As it is deducted from the lecturer’s notes, the students were motivated to share their “Best” of presentations among their circles in Google+ (Google’s social networking tool). Despite some disagreements among students while proposing innovative solutions (mainly due to educational background diversity), climate of professional collaboration was evident. Through ubiquitous online collaboration and communication, students were motivated to become responsible for their own learning; develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills; and gain deeper understanding of the subject.

FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS This study has explored the implementation of CBSCL with the use of mobile devices in MIS-151 Business Software Applications course. More studies are needed to investigate the implementation of this virtual learning environment in other courses. In addition, future studies could consider other types of data collection. The current study has examined students’ views expressed through focus groups and the lecturer’s written notes based on her online and in-class observations. In order to investigate the effectiveness of CBSCL, audio-recorded data in such virtual environments, could also be invaluable since they would capture the actual interaction that takes place among students and lecturers. The analysis of such type of data collection can help educators and researchers detect the actual process of communication and learning and provide them with more precise and detailed information.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

CONCLUSION This study has explored the implementation of CBSCL approach through mobile devices in MIS-151 Business Software Applications course. This virtual learning environment has proven to be an engaging and challenging approach to teaching and learning, that has motivated students to access Google Application Tools using the technology they utilize in their daily lives; i.e. their mobile devices. Through ubiquitous online communication and collaboration, students have become more responsible for their own learning in mainly solving problems related to technology applications in business contexts. With initially individual investigations and then through online group discussions, students have eventually met their educational outcomes. They have acquired new knowledge; shared experiences; agreed on and solved related challenges; and finally, they have come-up with professional solutions. The authors recommend that, despite the fact that CBSCL design, development and implementation requires time and effort, educators may consider implementing CBSCL in order to encourage and moti-

41

 Promoting Virtual Collaborative Learning with the Use of Mobile Devices

vate students to tackle any challenge for their learning process. This virtual learning environment, when designed properly and with the appropriate guidance, encourages students to become self-learners and actively participate in addressing challenges that have an impact on technology applications in business. Although it is acknowledged that implementing such an approach in a cloud environment is challenging and requires a lot of effort, considering the learning outcomes, it is worth every effort.

REFERENCES Ala-Mutka, K., Punie, Y., & Ferrari, A. (2009). Review of Learning in Online Networks and Communities. In U. Cress, V. Dimitrova, & M. Specht (Eds.), EC-TEL 2009, LNCS 5794, European Communities 2009 (pp. 350–364). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-04636-0_34 An, Y.-J., Aworuwa, B., Ballard, G., & Williams, K. (2009). Teaching with Web 2.0 Technologies: Benefits, Barriers and Best Practices. Retrieved February 11, 2017 from: http://www.aect.org/pdf/ proceedings09/2009/09_1.pdf Bonwell, Ch. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ERIC Digest. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education/George Washington University. Digital Media, J. I. S. C. (n.d.). Mobile learning for education guide. Retrieved September 10, 2014, from: http://www.jiscdigitalmedia.ac.uk/guide/mobile-learning-for-education Eteokleous, N., & Ktoridou, D. (2011). Higher education: A Web 2.0 world of communication, collaboration, participation and sharing. Proceedings of ICICTE-International Conference on ICT in Education, 1-10. Hargadon, S. (2009). White paper on educational networking: The important role Web 2.0 will play in education. Retrieved October 15, 2010 from http://www.elluminate.com Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1991). Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Ktoridou, D., & Doukanari, E. (2016). Promoting multidisciplinary collaboration through a challengebased virtual learning environment. In J. Whatley & N. Chrissi (Eds.), Teaching with Team Projects in Higher Education (pp. 61–71). Santa Rosa, CA: Informing Science Publishing. Ktoridou, D., Doukanari, E., & Epaminonda, E. (2016). Designing a product development process graduate course: An interdisciplinary example. In Proceedings of IEEE EDUCON 2016 - Global Engineering Education Conference (pp. 1092-1095). IEEE Xplore Press. 10.1109/EDUCON.2016.7474689 Ktoridou, D., Eteokleous, N., & Dionysiou, I. (2013). Google’s applications for undergraduate university courses: Tools for sharing, communication and collaboration. In Handbook of Research on Didactic Strategies and Technologies for Education: Incorporating Advancements (pp. 632 – 645). Educational IS&T Books. McKeachie, W. (1986). Teaching Tips (8th ed.). Lexington, MA: Heath & Co. Meyers, C., & Jones, T. B. (1993). Promoting Active Learning: Strategies for the College Classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

 Promoting Virtual Collaborative Learning with the Use of Mobile Devices

Murugesan, S. (2009). Social Issues and Web 2.0: A Closer Look at Culture in E-Learning. In Handbook of Research on Web 2.0, 3.0, and X.0: Technologies, Business, and Social Applications. Sydney, Australia: IGI Global. Richardson, W. (2009). Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and other Powerful Web Tools for Classrooms (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Sclatter, N. (2010). eLearning in the cloud. International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments, 1(1), 10–19. doi:10.4018/jvple.2010091702 UNESCO Institute for Information Technologies in Education. (2010). Cloud computing in education, policy brief. Author. United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2012). Mobile Learning for Teachers in Europe. Retrieved September 20 2014 from: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002161/216167e.pdf Wolf, T. (2010). Google apps for education users grow to 10 million. TMCnet Education Technology. Retrieved October 1, 2011 from: http://education.tmcnet.com/topics/education/articles/109042-googleapps-education-users grow-10-million.htm

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

This research was previously published in the Handbook of Research on Technology-Centric Strategies for Higher Education Administration edited by Purnendu Tripathi and Siran Mukerji; pages 393-404, copyright year 2017 by Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global).

43

44

Chapter 4

Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education: Knowledge, Skills, and Attitudes José-Alberto Herrera-Bernal Tecnologico de Monterrey, Mexico Darinka del Carmen Ramírez-Hernández Tecnologico de Monterrey, Mexico María-Soledad Ramírez-Montoya Tecnologico de Monterrey, Mexico

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

ABSTRACT The purpose of this chapter is to present a case study for evaluating the competences (knowledge, skills, and attitudes) applied by students in Higher Education by using m-learning devices in a course taught in an online distance education. The research question was: Which skills do the students need to learn through m-learning devices? Two variables used in this study were: m-learning and learning technology skills. The results shows that m-learning becomes an extension, addition and/or evolution of online studying and that the student requires a set of basic knowledge and skills to handle cell phones and iPods as learning tools. Students also develop skills in computing, communication, productivity, relationships, leadership, self-study while being involved in a study mode such as mobile learning. Students also require competences such as self-management, evaluation and selection of information, creativity, communication and collaborative work.

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-1757-4.ch004

Copyright © 2020, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION In the field of education, there is a new mode of learning based on the use of mobile devices (like cell phones, iPods, tablets and others) and this is called m-learning or mobile learning; which aim is to give the students the opportunity to develop and strengthen competences (knowledge, skills and attitudes), with the ease of learning anywhere and anytime and as an option to enhance their learning. Therefore, this chapter presents a case study that was done on students of an online program in Higher Education that learned under the m-learning mode. One of the main issues that is presented and discussed in this chapter is that although Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) have developed rapidly, and teachers and students have the opportunity to use this for the learning processes, there are every day more and more people, especially in adult education, that need the facilities for time and space for learning but do not have the required competences, and probably most of them, also do not have the abilities for using complex devices. In this way, although cell phones and iPods are at the moment pretty basic, six years ago they were not, and they still are not for many adults that want a Higher Education. Thus, this research provides information that gives an inside look for teachers and students about the competences needed to face the mobile learning mode. It will help to find areas for improvement either in materials, content or in the ways of confronting the student to this mode, in such a way that the educational practice for teachers, students and institutions could enrich themselves. The issues raised in this study reflect a modern society where economic, social and cultural phenomena have global importance and learning how to learn is paramount. Under this scenario, some educational methods such as: online education, education through mobile or m-learning ;and within these concepts such as education mediated by Information Technology, educational platforms, digitization and development have emerged such skills (Cabero, 2007). The study case presented here includes the analysis of the knowledge students are applying in the use of the m-learning devices in a graduate course taught in the distance education mode in order to generate the skills that will enrich the subject area. The sample used for this study has some important demographic characteristics such as: they were all adults, postgraduate students, they all worked full time, they lived far away from the university, they all lived far away from each other and most of them had limited access to technology and/or communication. Based on this outlook and the gap in terms to meet the necessary learning through mobile devices skills, the research question was: What skills students require in learning through m-learning devices? Therefore, although the research question is focus on skills, the overall objective of this study was to analyze the knowledge, skills and attitudes that students are applying in the use of m-learning devices in distance education, in order to generate knowledge that enriches this area of discipline and provides information that may be useful for those who work with a learning environment of distance education and specifically at Higher Education level. The chapter is organized first with some literature review and background of the problem itself, followed by the main body of the chapter that is: the description of the case study (methodology and results) and with the solutions and recommendations for the issues that are raised. Finally, the last section of the chapter includes what are the trends for future work, an overall conclusion and the key terms and definitions that had been used.

45

 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

BACKGROUND As Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) are developing frequently, new learning approaches have been introduced to facilitate teaching and learning processes. Thus, e-learning has revolutionized the educational field. This fact and the rise of mobile technology have led to the emergence of m-learning. Mobile devices are growing in popularity and there has been an increasing interest in their potential as innovative tools for learning. Within the concepts relevant to the development of the theoretical framework for this chapter, some concepts are described: the m-learning information technology, e-learning or mobile learning, and skills development in the educational environment. There are many terms used to describe learning that is delivered online, via the internet, ranging from Distance Education, to computerized electronic learning, online learning, internet learning and many others. We define e-learning as courses that are specifically delivered via the internet to somewhere other than the classroom where the professor is teaching (according to the North Carolina Education Cabinet and Office of the Governor site). In this sense, the development and the use of learning environments, coupled with the evolution of mobile computing, have contributed significantly to the establishment of a new learning modality known as mobile learning (m-learning) (Filho & Barbosa, 2015). For this reason m-learning is a new learning approach intending to use mobile devices such as laptops, smart phones and personal digital assistants (PDAs) with the purpose of process learning in any place and at any time. In this sense, m-learning application needs to be designed in a way that it considers the special features and constraints of mobile devices such as screen size, available storage, and processor speed as well as battery life (Al-Harrasi, Al-Khanjari & Sarrab, 2015). In addition, it is also important to consider the workplace-based learning environment (Jaschke 2015). The tendency for today and the near future is that m-learning will no longer be a choice but a necessity in the modern way of learning so that students will be able to keep pace with the times and technology (Milošević, Živković, Manasijević & Nikolić, 2015). Mobile learning (m-learning) has become an important educational technology component in higher education (Al-Emran, Elsherif & Shaalan, 2016; Yeap, Ramayah & Soto-Acosta, 2016; Milošević et al., 2015). One of the reasons is the student’s affinity with technology and the ubiquity of mobile computing devices on campuses; the other reason is that it can be easily and quickly accessed and be used for learning resources anytime and anywhere. But mobility also brings a new challenge. Students may now be constantly moving and the context from which they learn has to be adjusted dynamically. Therefore adaptation is becoming increasingly important when it comes to m-learning (Garcia-Cabot, Garcia-Lopez, De-Marcos, Fernandez & Gutierrez-Martinez, 2015). This technology requires certain competences or development in order to adapt and be used efficiently. The Oxford Concise Dictionary defines competence as “the ability to do something successfully or efficiently” (Stevenson & Waite, 2011, p. 1682). However, there are different definitions for competences, mainly because it has been suggested that one broad definition is not suitable for all professions, but they all include the three basic elements: knowledge, skills and attitudes (Innes, Leboeuf-Yde & Walker (2016). There are some studies that focus on providing a solid theoretical and empirical foundation for mobile learning in the context of distance education and some of the authors mention some critical factors that have a direct impact on how students use m-learning. Reychav, Dunaway and Kobayashi (2015) describe the importance in the guidance for using this technology so it can be effective in the teaching process. It is mentioned that m-learning helps students to learn, collaborate, and share ideas among themselves with the aid of internet and technology development (Al-Emran et al, 2016). Although it favors collaboration among students and teachers, there must be a balance in the teaching process because of the

 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

rapid technological changes (Lam, Yau & Cheung, 2010). In a qualitative study presented by Krotov (2015), the presented results showed that some of the success factors fall into the domain of people, pedagogy and technology. Another important factor is the attitude towards this technology (Cheng, 2015) because this will help to identify strengths and weaknesses in learners and educators that use m-learning (Al-Emran et al., 2016). In this sense, some ideas for future work involve the incorporation of games (Taharim, Lokman, Isa & Noor, 2016). An empirical study presented by Garcia-Cabot et al. (2015) suggested that mobile adaptation had a limited impact in learning performance of practical skills when compared to an e-learning approach. Finally, Waliński (2014) presents some m-learning activities which contribute to the intercultural activities.

THE CASE STUDY In this section of the chapter the authors present the details of the case study itself: the method, the population and sample, the descriptive statistic of the sample, the subject categories and indicators of the study, the information sources, the data collection techniques, the application of the research instruments, the capture and analysis of data and the analysis and interpretation of results.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

The Method In the broad field of research there are two main approaches, quantitative and qualitative, and within each, a range of methods that can address specific topics (Basabe, 2007) is located. It arises by combining what is known as a mixed approach. The mixed approach is a process that collects, analyzes and links quantitative and qualitative data in the same study to answer an approach to the problem (Teddie & Tashakkori, 2003; Creswell, 2005; Mertens, 2005; Williams, Unrau & Grinnell, 2005 quoted by Hernández, Fernández & Baptista, 2006). With this kind of approach, this study aims to analyze the knowledge, skills and attitudes applied by students in a postgraduate course taught at a distance where the use of mobile devices as learning tools is done in order to generate knowledge that enriches this subject area and provide information that may be useful for those who work with them in a learning environment. The purpose of developing this research with a mixed approach is to have a more precise perspective of the phenomenon, and also to have a more holistic, comprehensive perception of it. The parallel approach of complex mixed method suggested by Hernández et al. (2006) is the one that was of interest for this research, since both the quantitative and qualitative approach intermingle in most of the stages of the research process. In the specific case of this study, the methodologies used were the ex post facto non experimental cross correlation method and case studies, which allowed the intermingling of both the quantitative and the qualitative approach thus achieving linking, contrasting and comparing the obtained data. The ex post facto correlational non experimental cross method can be defined as a research design in which information is obtained from previous events or situations and that allows examining and identifying relationships or differences between variables (Cook & Campbell, 1979, quoted by González, 1998). This method was applied to the students during several graduate courses in the form of distance learning by making use of mobile devices.

47

 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

Hernández et al. (2006) mention that this type of methodology collects data at one time and that its intention is to describe the different relationships between variables; the latter not handled, only seen in its natural context, and its impact and interaction are analyzed in a given time. In the case of this study, these relationships and analysis break off directly from the research variables, m-learning and competences for learning with technology could be drawn into the same educational context allowing the identification of the different skills, knowledge and attitudes that are used by this new educational modality (such as the mobile learning by students). Generally, for this research approach, the methods of data collection are based on descriptions and observations and have little numerical measurement, since it is not intended to measure the phenomenon but to understand what happens in the same order to raise new situations that achieve a better researched fact (Grinnell, 1997 as quoted by Hernández et al. 2006). In education, the abovementioned has a relevant sense, since the situations are generated, it is difficult to give results based on numbers; therefore, the findings to be made should be governed by the objectivity of the researcher. So then, to refine and properly interpret the results obtained by means of ex post facto transversal correlational non experimental method, the case study was used. This research method includes the complexity of a particular case that is of interest to the researcher who seeks to detail the interaction with their contexts. Stake (2005) mentions that: “the case study is the study of the particularity and complexity of a particular case, to get to understand their activity in important circumstances” (p. 11). The case is specific, complex and running within a context. The case study allows analysis, and also the description and documentation that are made of a unique and historical event, such as the use of mobile devices in distance education programs. The next step was the field work, where the researcher was given the task of implementing the selected instruments and defining the population sample followed by the organization of all the gathered information, analysis and conclusions and possible suggestions to how it was reached. Finally, the analysis and complete research require objectivity, in order not to miss out on the information collected and an analysis based on the accuracy of the answers given.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Population and Sample The population is the set of cases that match a set of specifications (Selltiz et al., 1980, as quoted by Hernández et al., 2006). In the specific case of this study, the population that was targeted was made of 55 students who are part of the two remedial courses of the academic program in which a distance learning project was launched through mobile devices. The members of this population have as a main characteristic, a professional profile focusing on the use of technology. Some are engineers and graduates in computer science, however, although a minority, belong to the social sciences and humanities profiles (e.g. accountants, psychologists and law degree students). This diversity of profiles allowed having a fairly broad perspective on the subject studied. By having this study as a mixed approach and with the use of a questionnaire as a tool for data collection, in order to find the necessary information that would enable to answer the research question of this study: “What skills students require in learning through m-learning devices?” a sample was taken. There are basically two types of sampling: probability and non-probability; the choice between one and the other is determined based on the problem statement, hypothesis, research design and scope thereof. So then, for this study a sample of probabilistic type was defined, which is a subgroup of the population in which the choice of the elements does not depend on chance but on the characteristics of the research

 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

(Hernández et al., 2006). This non-probability sample was of the voluntary type (Giroux & Tremblay, 2004), this derivative of the participants in this research were invited through a call. Since being distance learning students, it was difficult to contact every one of them to answer the questionnaire; this sample was composed by 13 students. On the other hand, besides having the opportunity to work with students, there was also the opportunity to work with a key number of informants, people who gave detailed information because of their experience or knowledge of the subject under study (Hernández et al., 2006). In this case study, the informants used were three of the teachers who teach courses that rely on mobile devices and the director of educational technology team that participated in the incorporation of mobile learning in the courses of the academic program. These people (the three teachers and the director of educational technology team) were not part of the sample, but were very important in order to gather the information about the teaching–learning processes with the mobile devices and furthermore for making possible to do the validation of this study (triangulation). These people participated as external observers.

Descriptive Statistic of the Sample The sample for this study was conformed by13 students from a Remedial Course taught at the nowadays called online Distance Education Program for a Master´s Degree in Education at the Tecnologico de Monterrey (it used to be called Universidad Virtual from Tecnologico de Monterrey until 2014). This course was taught during their first semester of their studies at the Education Master´s Degree Program and this investigation was done during the period of January-May 2008. All of these students have the characteristic of being adult people between the ages of 25-40, with an average age of 35, a median of 28 and a mode of 30 and all of them do worked full time, and therefore they are in the online Distance Education Program. They all have different educational background varying from engineers to sociologies. They were located in different places around Mexico (1 in Saltillo, Coahuila; 2 in Monterrey, Nuevo León; 1 in Queretaro, Queretaro; 1 Puebla, Puebla), and at different countries in Latin America (5 in Colombia and 3 in Ecuador). The sample of 13 pupils was made up by 5 women and 8 men. Most of them were located at rural places where connectivity could be unreliable and also they were not always updated and used to the new ICT.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Subject Categories and Indicators of the Study The topic proposed for the case of this research was to find the skills required for learning through mlearning devices. The study of this subject can be organized into categories or overall dimensions, this according to the literature review. The dimensions that were tested are as follows; personal dimension of the students, the m-learning and learning technology skills. In the personal dimension of the students, the purpose was to find evidence that would meet the professional profile of the student in order to get to know more in detail the type of sample with which this study was developed and therefore have better support and understanding when given an interpretation of the data obtained through the various instruments used during the course of the study. In corresponding to the m-learning dimension, the purpose was to find information on the following indicators:

49

 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

1. Curriculum Information on the Use of Mobile Learning in Courses that Were Part of This Study: This indicator was intended to allow to find the advantages and disadvantages associated with using mobile devices as a learning tool as well as the amount of materials for each course handled via a mobile device (Ally, 2004; Flanagan and Calandra, 2005 ; Kukulska-Hulme & Traxler, 2005; Metcalf, 2006). So these factors are important in the development of skills for learning through mobile devices. 2. Institutional Resources: This indicator determines the type of platforms, mobile devices and certain aspects of the instructional design of the materials used in each course (Ally, 2004, Arrigo, Gentile, Taibi, Chiappone and Tegolo, 2004; James, 2007). So it was possible to know specifically about how mobile students have developed their skills and knowledge during their courses. Finally, with regard to the dimension of learning technology skills, the following indicators were studied:

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

1. Operations and Basic Computer Skills: This indicator made it possible to determine if the students have some basic knowledge and skills that allow the use of mobile devices (Aguado & Arranz, 2005; Argudín, 2001; Cabero & Llorente, 2006; Corvalan and Hawes, 2006; Lopez, 2006). 2. M-Learning Tools for Productivity: This indicator allowed to find if the students are able to improve their productivity and creativity both in their work and academic (Argudín, 2006; Cabero & Llorente, 2006). 3. Tools M-Learning and Communication Skills: This indicator made it possible to know if the students are able to communicate effectively (information and results) to their teammates and / or tutor (Argudín, 2001; Bergero & Esnaola, 2006; Cabero & Llorente, 2006). 4. M-Learning Tools for Research, Reading Skills, Critical Thinking: This indicator made it possible to determine whether the students can make use of mobile devices to develop their ability to investigate, evaluate information from different sources whether electronic or not (Argudín, 2001; Cabero & Llorente, 2006; Corvalan & Hawes, 2006; Salas, 2005). 5. M-Learning Tools for Problem Solving and Decision Making, Self-Direction and SelfAdministration: This indicator allowed the students to find important skills such as the ability to solve problems, leadership, self-administration by relying on the use of mobile devices (Aguado & Arranz, 2005; Argudín, 2001; Cabero & Llorente, 2006; Corvalan & Hawes 2006; Proenza & Leyva 2006; Quinn, 2007; Salas, 2005).

Information Sources Information sources for this research were: 1. Students of the two remedial courses offered by the academic distance program where mobile devices as a learning tool were used, 2. Three tutor consultants implemented courses that rely on mobile learning, 3. The director of educational technology team that participated in the incorporation of mobile devices in the remote program courses and finally, 4. The content of the remedial courses through the electronic platform on which the investigation was structured and implemented.

 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

The students of the courses (the sample) are the main characters in the teaching-learning process. They are in direct contact with the materials, activities and everything that involves the use of mobile devices in the remedial courses therefore they are the most important sources of information in this study. The tutors or teachers (that participated as external observers) are professionals with experience in different academic programs and areas such as business and management, engineering and information technology. They have been present in the teaching-learning processes since the beginning of the project with the design and application of the mobile devices as tools for support learning. This is the reason for having them as sources for gathering not only data that helped to answer the research question, but also to shape the contextual framework of the same. In relation to the team leader of educational technology (another external observer), he/she is responsible for giving support to the production of all courses at the professional level and postgraduate taught at the institution where this study was conducted. His/her participation as a source of information was very important because, as the tutors, he/she was instrumental in the birth of mobile learning project. Finally, and not least important, the content of courses; the access to this source of information served to review in detail why and what activities are taking place in each course through mobile devices, also it served to know how many of the materials developed for use on mobile devices were via cell phones and iPods.

Data Collection Techniques Using a mixed approach in the design of this study allowed the use of both, quantitative and qualitative techniques, which were used depending on the categories and indicators, defined for the study and had to do with the source of the information. The techniques used in this study were a self-administered questionnaire, a semi structured interview and the observation. The questionnaire is perhaps the most widely used instrument for collecting data; this is a set of questions regarding one or more variables that need to be measured (Hernández et al., 2006). Four types of the questionnaires are distinguished:

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

1. The interview questionnaire, 2. In person survey (the researcher communicates with the respondent face to face) or telephone survey (the researcher communicates with the respondent by telephone, which can be very annoying and non-response rates are usually quite high with this kind of instrument). The other two types of questionnaire are: 1. Self-administered questionnaire, in which the respondent reads the questions himself; in this case, the respondent delivers the questionnaire back to the researcher, and 2. Questionnaire applied by postal mail or electronic mail. This last one is used very often (Giroux & Tremblay, 2004). In the case of this study, the questionnaire applied was self-administered via a website (Hernández et al., 2006). This instrument provides the advantage of being able to be applied to a sample distributed in different places (Giroux & Tremblay, 2004), which is the case of this study because some students were located far away. The students that were questioned with this survey, and that are the sample for

51

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

this study, were part of a distance academic program, which were distributed in different states of the country and even a great majority of them were located in other countries. The easiest way to send the information was through an electronic link placed at the workspace of each remedial course. The risk of using a self-administered via website questionnaire as an instrument is that some of the interaction between people can be missed and this could happen because the sequence of questions is determined and influences cannot be altered or whatsoever. This means that the instrument should be applied just as it is. The recommendation is that this kind of instrument be used only when the researcher has the experience on the field and also has strong elements to build questions and provide information in the questionnaire that can be answered properly. For this, the researcher must take care of the issues raised by the questions. Furthermore, these questions must be of interest of the respondent, they must not be ambiguous, should use common vocabulary, neutral terms, and not be in denial nor implausible (Giroux & Tremblay, 2004; Hernández et al., 2006). For the specific case of this research, this questionnaire was carefully designed in each detail. In developing the questionnaire, three types of questions were used: closed, open and semi-open. The first exhibit closed questions, limit responses, so subjects are confined to designated answers, either dichotomous or of multiple option (Hernández et al., 2006). Open questions do not limit the respondents to certain answers, therefore, the number of responses can be infinite, plus it gives the opportunity to the respondent to answer in their own words. These are also useful when there is a need for knowing deep inside the reasons of the interviewer’s answer. The semi-open questions are those that when placed on a questionnaire allows the respondent not to be forced to choose an answer that does not suit him or that does not agree with him, therefore it is an option in the questionnaire that says: “Other (specify)” (Giroux & Tremblay, 2004, p. 134). For this study, questions of the three types were used. This was done according to the categories and indicators that needed to be and also because of the limiting capability of contacting the respondents for being far away. The other reason for this was the number of people that answered the questionnaire. The categories or dimensions investigated with this instrument were: the personal dimension of the student, m-learning and learning competence with technology. Out of this, a set of indicators were detached to subcategories, that is: the curriculum of m-learning dimension, operations and basic computer concepts, basic computer skills, m-learning tools for productivity, m-learning and communication skills. On the other hand, according to Stake (2005), much of what we cannot see personally, others have observed. Two of the main applications of case studies are with the purpose of obtaining information of descriptions and interpretations from others. In this sense, the interview is the ideal instrument for getting to know multiple realities from the environment and from different points of view. The interview is a kind of conversation systematically developed with clearly defined questions and with the purpose of learning more about a phenomena (Giroux & Tremblay, 2004). When this instrument is used, it is important to define the selection of individuals to be interviewed in order to obtain the appropriate data for the research. It also allows the researcher to interview face to face with the respondent while helping to gather more accurate data for the investigation. The interview used in this study was applied through a video that was recorded for later analysis (Burgos, 2007). In addition, the interview is defined as a meeting to exchange information between one person and another or others, so it is an attractive proposition for researchers with a basic technique. However, it depends on the ability of the researcher of how to conduct the conversation (Denscombe, 2003; Hernández et al., 2006). If the interview is well organized and well done, it can provide reliable data for the phenomenon to be studied. The application of this interview requires that the researcher pay close attention to some

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

details such as to remember (because it is a conversation). The research must flow with the dynamics of it in order to be able to establish an environment of trust between the interviewer and the interviewee. The main thing here is that the interviewer should lead the pace and direction of the interview. The social context is important for the interpretation of meanings; the dynamics of the interview can take different refinements to those required, so the interviewer must be clear at all times with the purposes. The interviewers should adjust their communication to the language of the respondent (Hernández et al., 2006). The interviews are divided into structured, semi-structured, and unstructured or open (Grindell, 1997, quoted by Hernández et al., 2006). The first questions of the questionnaire are specific and wellstructured kind of questions. The semi-structured questions are based on a guide but the researcher is free to introduce additional questions to clarify concepts or further information. Finally, open interviews are based on a general guide with no specific topic and the researcher has the flexibility to handle it. The type of semi-structured interview was used in this research, because it had a guide but the researcher had also the flexibility to include more questions, when needed, for clarifying concepts and information. Applying new questions on the subject being analyzed helps gathering information that the researcher did not think before the design of the investigation. During the interviews in this investigation, there was not enough time for asking questions that arose during the interview. The other problem was that because the interview was done using a satellite connection, once the time was over, the interview was over. This interview was done with the tutors and advisers, the director of the educational technology equipment because all of them were the key informants for the development of this study. This interview as an instrument was used to investigate the following categories or dimensions: mlearning and competences for learning with technology, which some indicators were detached as they are the curriculum of m-learning and institutional resources that are of supports for the use of mobile devices by students (m-learning dimension). Another category was operations and basic computer concepts and skills, m-learning tools for productivity, m-learning tools and communication skills (learning skills dimension). And finally, the category that we called m-learning tools for research which essentially is divided in: reading skills, critical thinking and m-learning tools for problem solving and decision making, self-direction and self-administration (learning and technology skills dimension). The observation is another instrument that was used in this investigation for the qualitative section. It is defined as: “The oldest technique for collecting scientific data and the most widespread considering science as a whole” (Giroux & Tremblay, 2004, p. 179). It is important because observation helps to have a better understanding of the student learning process. The observations may lead the researcher to a better understanding of the whole case at study and allow the registration of events, which also provides a description of the situation that will be useful in the analysis of the data (Stake, 2005). The purpose of observation is to know and to understand at the same time, the reality of the context under investigation. And so we can expand the meaning of the information obtained through the different instruments that serve as means for obtaining data, no matter that they are instruments in the qualitative or quantitative approach, as is the case of this study. The kind of observation that was made in this study is known as non-participant type, which is defined as the technique where the observer does not participate in the activities of the sample that has been under study (Giroux & Tremblay, 2004). For this research, observation was applied with the purpose of gathering information about how the content, structure and design of the remedial courses under study were affected by the use of mobile devices as learning tools. The categories that were examined via observation were the personal dimension of the student and the m-learning. These observations were made by the researcher himself. 53

 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

Application of the Research Instruments The self-administered questionnaire (Appendix 1) was applied via an electronic link and was designed for questioning the students and participants such as tutor’s advisers of each course and the director of educational technology that participated in this investigation. The semi-structured interview (Appendix 2) was applied to tutors and advisers, and to the director of educational technology team that participated in the incorporation of the use of mobile devices in the investigated distance education course. This interview was conducted via videoconference which was subsequently recorded for the analysis of the information. The observation of the teaching-learning (Appendix 3) processes using mobile devices was held throughout the investigation. Before the application of each of the instruments mentioned above, a consent form was sent to each participant, this was done for ethical purposes.

Capture and Analysis of Data

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

In this study three different instruments were used for capturing and analyzing the data. There were applied, depending on the source, by category and indicator. The data obtained from the questionnaire was coded according to the coding manual by Giroux and Tremblay (2004) in order to use it as a descriptive statistical technique to perform data analysis. In addition, for the data collected through observation, there is an observation form that was proposed by Stake (2005) and (Hernández et al., 2006) and that was used in this investigation. With this form, the data collected mainly related to the content and structure of the remedial courses was analyzed for the understanding of the m-learning dimension. Finally the interview via videoconference was reviewed later, once and again, and did allow the analysis of the remedial course. To validate the data and to ensure the reliability of the results obtained, a triangulation of sources (Stake, 2005) was made. Triangulation means that the researcher compares the data collected from the different sources using the instruments applied in this investigation. With this information, the researcher can give a reasonable answer to the question or hypothesis made for the investigation and also is able to make proper conclusions. These information sources were: 13 students who completed the remedial distance course in which the mobile learning mode was implemented (this was the sample under study); three tutor’s advisers and the director of the production team of educational technology. Once the triangulation of information sources was made, the interpretation of results was performed based on the theoretical framework and categories and indicators identified during the study.

Analysis and Interpretation of the Results The results obtained by this investigation are presented in this section. The triangulation made with the self-questionnaire, interview and observation allowed the researcher to identify which skills the students needed to learn through m-learning devices, which answered the question under study. Although this results applied for the sample being used, the authors consider that this are the basic skills and attitudes that students need today to learn for using technology such as mobile devises in their learning processes. The main ideas that answer this question by means of this study are presented as follows.

 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

1. The M-Learning as a Supporting Point for Skills Development: The purpose of using mobile devices in the course that was under study was to develop reasoning and problem solving, as well as critical thinking (among other skills) so students developed some individual and collaborate competences through the activities along with their learning processes. This is the goal of the school were the study was done; the students education is centered on the development of competences (Miranda, 2007). In this sense, the aim of the teaching- learning process was to use all the design resources to be used by the mobile devices. Some resources that were used are: audio-cases, interviews and video-conference. Some of the results obtained by the interview and observation are that materials were developed to be used by these mobile devices by a team of interdisciplinary professionals. This team is made up of the professor of the course, the instructional designer, the graphical designer and the web programmer. The teacher (professor) is responsible for the content of the class. The teacher is the expert in the subject. Also in this team these suggestions are addressed by an instructional designer who is in charge of enhancing the materials (with audio and video). Thus, according to Table 1, approximately 32% of the activities of the course consisted of materials that were developed for using the cell phone and the iPods. However, in an interview with key informants, it appears that the percentage of activities based in m-learning materials developed in the course were launched up to more than that, according to some people to more than 40%. Based on the triangulation of information obtained by both, the key informants and the observation of the course under study, it can be said that depending on the recommendations of the instructional designer, objectives, content and activities were designed. Within these materials a self-study guides were designed especially for using cell phones and iPods. Table 1. Activities % that were designed for the application of the mobile devices Total Number of Activities per Week

Activities with the Use of Cellular Phones

Activities with the Use of iPod

Week 1

4

1

1

Week 2

6

1

2

Week 3

3

0

0

Week 4

3

1

0

Week 5

4

1

0

Week 6

4

1

1

Week 7

5

0

0

Week 8

4

1

0

Week 9

3

1

1

Week 10

5

1

2

Week 11

5

8

7

Total

46

8

7

%

100

17.39

15.25

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Week Number

55

 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

The aimed of these materials were to support the learning process for the student. These learning activities were designed for each week and for each module that integrates the total course. There are also audio readings of research reports, book chapters, etc., which were part of the basic set of references that students at some point had to consult in order to develop either individual or team learnings. The comments from the students and tutors about the materials used in the course are summarized in Table 1.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

2. The M-Learning Becomes an Extension, Addition, or Evolution of the Online Learning Courses: The fact that the students who participated in this research are students who are part of an online graduate program and also are in their first semester, bring us a new set of challenges and possibilities for the learning processes by using mobile devices. This put them in front of an evolutionary process in which the books and printed documents have been supplemented by information technology (Fernández, 2004). The use of m-learning either can be seen as an extension, supplement or developments online study (Laouris, 2005), and as mentioned by the key informants and the same students surveyed in this study, is a very good option for professionals with limited time and lack of flexibility in their work and personal schedules. More people can be achieved by the education through mobile devices. The students participating in this research coincide with key informants in that the m-learning offers certain advantages such as the facility to download and exchange information, the feeling of being more comfortable with the virtual context in which they are involved than without it and that it facilitates the access to course content (Quinn, 2007; De Crom, 2005). Another advantages mentioned by the students of this study were: better use of “downtime”, better management of time of study, better delivery of the course activities and better quality of service that the school provides. Network and m-learning became the best way to access quickly all the information that students require according to their levels of responsibility and competence (Gallego, 2003), this happens by allowing the students to be more productive when they consume, interact with or create information using a mobile device (Quinn, 2007). 3. The Student Requires a Set of Knowledge and Basic Tools for Managing Learning as Cell Phones and iPods Skills: Currently, one of the main features is that society is organized around Information, Technology and Communication (ITC) (Cabero, 2001), and in this context the use of mobile devices requires and demands, like any human activity, a minimum set of capabilities and basic skills for the knowing-how- in an specific context (Posadas, 2004). It is required a minimum of knowledge and digital skills to enable students to develop their analytical and critical sense in their learning process when using technology (Cabero, 2006). This set of basic skills in the use of information technologies considered in this study (International Technology Education Association, 2000; Cabero, 2006), implies for the student to demonstrate a solid understanding of the nature and operation of technological systems, and for the specific case of this research, the use of cell phone and iPod, where practical knowledge is involved by the student with respect to know how to send and to receive text messages on his/her cell phone, managing iPod and know how to manage a podcast in an iPod. These are basic skills and abilities that students should have to be involved with the use of m-learning. Unfortunately the results show that these basic skills and abilities that involve information technology are not exactly what the majority of the students know. This could be one of the main reasons of why not all students are motivated to get involved with the m-learning. Also we need to remember that most of the students at the online learning program live in other countries, probably far from the city, with limited access or less access to technology.

 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

Although this situation occurs, those who do not have these basic skills, look for ways to acquire and develop these skills, either independently or with someone else support or technological tools that help people to learned by themselves on how to use technology. So consciously or unconsciously a degree of motivation is awakened in them by the use of mobile devices as a learning tool. In this study the results showed that some of the students have the basic skills such as handling the iPod, spend Podcast these devices and sending message handling texts, acquired self-taught. However, which is reflective of the student is that he/she develops some ability for self-direction (Quinn, 2007). Thus, the students achieved best advantage of the tools offered by the use of mobile devices and allow easy adaptation to the contexts of distance education and labor in which the students are involved daily.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

4. The Student Develops Computer Skills, Communication, Productivity, Relationships, Leadership, Self-Study when Become Involved in a Learning Process such as M -Learning: Within the skills that students develop by using mobile devices (International Technology Education Association, 2000; Cabero, 2006; Argudín, 2001), and that have been observed in this study are: processing information, information search, evaluation and selection of the information. All these benefits are due to the activities that were applied to the online course by using the mobile devices: cellular phones and iPod. This allowed the students to learn on their own, in other spaces and time outside the schedule class time. As a consequence, students are able to practice their verbal and reading skills because these actions involves talking, listening, reading, expressing in a proper way, communicate ideas and collaborate with others along with the class activities. The latter involve the students to develop skills for productivity and relationships, as many of the occasions the teams are composed of professionals from different disciplinary areas such as engineers, accountants, administrators and others. Thus, students can be critical, improve their relationships and get to know properly to access information. Mobile devices allow them to improve their communication skills between each other, and between their tutor advisor and teacher. It also promotes skills to integrate knowledge from other disciplines (Argudín, 2001). One of the most important skills expected to achieve by using this mobile devices was to solve problems and make informed decisions both in real life and at the course activities. Another skill that students develop through the process of using the mobile devices while learning is the selfconfidence for decision making, and this could evolve in developing leadership skills because they will have to vision, to propose and to anticipate creative alternatives for communicating with these devices. Another important skill that students have the opportunity to develop through the use of mobile devices is the ability of self-administration (Quinn, 2007; Argudín, 2001). This could lead to a better planning in their activities. They are driven to organize, coordinate, delegate and supervise the course activities on their own so that everyone is responsible for their own learning and for both individual and group performance. At the same time this actions stimulates and encourage the student for a big variety of tasks that involves learn to learn.

SOLUTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The use of mobile devices as a learning tool does not replace other means of learning to either an online or traditional mode of teaching. Rather it should be considered as an additional resource that supports and

57

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

enriches the teaching and learning processes. The purpose of the course under study was that students enrich the virtual environment and the educational model with the learning process of m-learning, and that the same students gain as a consequence the development of some competencies (skills and knowledge). Another objective was to get the knowledge to most people, especially those whose lifestyle does not allow them to be continuously connected either to the computer or to the Internet. Through the development of this study, there were important findings about the skills and attitudes that students apply and develop when they use m-learning in the modality of open distance learning courses. Some of these skills and attitudes are: management technology, specifically in the use of cellular phones and iPods, which should not act only as a regular entertainment or communication media purposes, but should also be directed towards their professional life in order to enrich their knowledge and develop better curricular activities. The mobile devices have the advantage of allowing a quicker and faster access to information, which at the same time, allows a better organization of the daily activities. Using m-learning devices also permit students to improve and implement their communication and reading skills, their research, evaluation and critical analysis of information; allowing them to process data with a broad perspective of what they have, what they want and where they want to go. In developing individual and team activities, they have the opportunity to apply self-learning skills such as leadership, collaborative and creative work with people from different professions, which consequently improves their interpersonal relationships and allows them to enhance their own professional discipline. These skills and attitudes are developed mainly due to the course design and to the kind of materials that are applied through the course activities. Some of these activities are as simple as sending text messages or Podcasts (audio-cases, interviews and explanations of the contents of the course). Although this does not mean that there are not new existing learning elements or more new mobile devices that could be used; but this will occur naturally as technology evolves itself. It can be said that students require skills, abilities and attitudes such as self-management, evaluation and betterment in the selection of information. Also creativity, communication and collaborative work in order to be immersed in an m-learning environment where information and technologies is an everyday thing in a digital society that demands skills, abilities and technical knowledge (which years ago were not necessary). The issue here is that the postgraduate students vary among different ages and not all of them are as adaptable as it is needed to be updated and skilled for using the new technologies that are required today for a convenient communication. Moreover, the results obtained in this study, allow those responsible for preparing the materials for the m-learning to have feedback about the students learning under the use of mobile devices. This could set a basis of prior knowledge of what competencies (skills and attitudes) the teacher or tutor must have as well as being able to stand up ahead in leading these teaching-learning processes of online distance education courses. Another factor observed in this study is that technology is not always presented in an ideal form. Mobile devices have certain physical problems, such as size, storage capacity, and incompatible technologies; sometimes these factors are due to social, economic and cultural situations. For example, in the case of people that are not in optimal economic conditions to acquire a specific mobile device, not everyone can see the benefits that a mobile device can provide as a learning tool or that not all telephony service providers are capable of supporting materials developed for the courses that are enriched through m-learning. This fact becomes worse with students that are located in rural areas with poor connectivity which minimizes the advantages of mobile learning and instead increases the disadvantages of this new mode of learning. In that direction, this research provides to the scientific field the contribution of knowing the competences

 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

(skills and attitudes) that students are applying to enrich their knowledge and learning by making use of mobile devices, through the so called m-learning. It is important to mention that day by day the students are getting more familiar with the use of technology (the younger the better), so learning based on the use of mobile devices to some extent is becoming easy to deal with for most of the people. As a final thought, the authors believe that it is important to remember that distance education is based on the use of technology; it is something that every day becomes more and more common, it is a way of bringing up knowledge anywhere and at any time regardless of distance, time and place. To the extent that schools, administrators, teachers and students have the means and resources to prepare and educate themselves, they succeed in that there is not only one personal and professional growth, but also a social level of growth. A first step in this growth is by being immersed in a learning mode as m-learning is, therefore, this mode is a great opportunity to continue understanding and researching for each and every one of those involved in the process of teaching and learning.

FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

One of the recommendations for future work is for teachers that have worked with distance education programs at Higher Education to balance between the new technology devices or ICT and the design of activities. This will allow students to develop properly all the competences (skills, abilities and attitudes) they need today for using and applying in a distance learning environment not only mobile devices, but also ICT. Also in this direction, innovation is always welcome to allow the mobile adaptation into the learning performance. There are many new ideas or trends (teaching strategies) that could enhance learning such as: flipped classroom, gamification, PBL and so on. It will only depend on the learning objective. The objective to seek for new ways of teaching and reaching people that are far away from the school site and with limited time for studying will be able to reach and to give education for more people around the world. The design of these activities could provide the proper learning environment towards the student attitude towards technology. A final recommendation for enhancing this work would be to try to elaborate the same study with a new sample today and to compare all utilizing the same parameters in order to see how, in only a short period of time (from 2008 to 2015), mobile devices and ICT have changed our world.

CONCLUSION Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) plays today a key role in peoples’ life and one of the challenges is to get education to everybody, no matter the place, time or age. This can have an important social impact around the world because education must be for everybody, and by doing this through technologies such as mobile devices, the so called m-learning, could be the opportunity for a better quality of life for many people. In that sense, one of the major contributions provided by this chapter is the evidence and results of this research (the case study), in which by gathering information about the competences (knowledge, skills and attitudes) that people at Higher Education need to have or develop, in order to be able to learn by distance, could inspire others to keep working in these issues, by finding new ways for teaching through technologies, by enhancing education and by reaching everyday more and more places and people.

59

 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

REFERENCES Aguado, D., & Arranz, V. (2005). Desarrollo de competencias mediante blended learning: un análisis descriptivo. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación, 40(1), 1-17. Retrieved from: http://www.rieoei. org/1118.htm Al-Emran, M., Elsherif, H. M., & Shaalan, K. (2016). Investigating attitudes towards the use of mobile learning in higher education. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 93–102. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.033 Al-Harrasi, H., Al-Khanjari, Z., & Sarrab, M. (2015) Proposing a new design approach for M-learning applications. International Journal of Software Engineering and its Applications, 9(11), 11-24. doi:10.14257/ijseia.2015.9.11.02 Ally, M. (2004). Using learning theories to design instruction for mobile learning devices. In Mobile learning anytime everywhere A book of papers from MLEARN 2004 (pp. 5-8). Retrieved from: http:// www.m-learning.org/knowledge-centre/m-learning-research.htm Argudín, Y. (2001). Educación basada en competencias. Educar Revista de educación. Retrieved from: http://educacion.jalisco.gob.mx/consulta/educar/19/argudin.html Arrigo, M., Gentile, M., Taibi, D., Chiappone, G., & Tegolo, D. (2004). mCLT: an application for collaborative learning on mobile telephone. In Mobile learning anytime everywhere. Learning and Skills Development Agency London. Basabe, F. (2007). Educación a distancia: en el nivel superior. México: Trillas. Burgos, V. (2007). Contextualizando el aprendizaje en movimiento. In A. Herrera, G. González, F. Lozano, & M. Ramirez (Eds.), Innovación en tecnología y educación Unpublished material for research purposes. Cabero, J. (2007). Nuevas Tecnologías Aplicadas a la Educación. McGraw Hill. Cabero, J., & Llorente, M. C. (2006). La rosa de los vientos. Dominios tecnológicos de las TIC por los estudiantes. Sevilla: Grupo de investigación Didáctica. Retrieved from: http://tecnologiaedu.us.es/nweb/ htm/bibliovir-libros.asp

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Cambridge Dictionaries Online. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/ Cheng, Y. M. (2015). Towards an understanding of the factors affecting m-learning acceptance: Roles of technological characteristics and compatibility. Asia Pacific Management Review, 20(3), 109–119. doi:10.1016/j.apmrv.2014.12.011 Corvalan, O., & Hawes, G. (2006) Aplicación del enfoque de competencias en la construcción curricular de la Universidad de Talca. Talca: Universidad de Talca. Documento de Trabajo IIDE-Proyecto MECESUP TAL101. De Crom, E. P., & De Jager, A. (2005). The “ME”-learning experience: PDA technology and e-learning in ecotourism at the Tshwane University of Technology (TUT). M-Learn. Retrieved from: http://www. mlearn.org.za/CD/papers/De%20Crom.pdf

 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

Denscombe, M. (2003). The good research guide: for small scale social projects. Maidenhead, PA: Open University. Diethelm, I., & Goschler, J. (2015). Questions on spoken language and terminology for teaching computer science. Paper presented at the Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education. 10.1145/2729094.2742600 Fernández, E. (2004). E-Learning. Implantación de proyectos de formación on-line. México: Alfa omega. Filho, N. F. D., & Barbosa, E. F. (2015) A contribution to the establishment of reference architectures for mobile learning environments. Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologías del Aprendizaje, 10(4), 234241. doi:10.1109/RITA.2015.2486339 Flanagan, B., & Calandra, B. (2005). Podcasting in the Classroom. Learning and Leading with Technology, 33(3), 20–23. Gallego, M. (2003). Intervenciones formativas basadas en WWW para guiar el inicio de la práctica profesional de los docentes. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación, 33. Retrieved from: http://www. rieoei.org/rie33a06.htm Garcia-Cabot, A., Garcia-Lopez, E., De-Marcos, L., Fernández, L., & Gutierrez-Martínez, J. (2014). Adapting learning content to user competences, context and mobile device using a multi-agent system: Case studies. International Journal of Engineering Education, 30(4), 937–949. Giroux, S., & Tremblay, G. (2004). Metodología de las ciencias humanas: La investigación en acción. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica. González, T. (1998). Análisis cognitivo del discurso del profesor mejor evaluado del ITESM campus Monterrey. Tesis de maestría. Monterrey, México: Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey. Hernández, R., Fernández, C., & Baptista, P. (2006). Metodología de la investigación. México: McGrawHill.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Innes, S. I., Leboeuf-Yde, C., & Walker, B. F. (2016). Similarities and differences of graduate entrylevel competencies of chiropractic councils on education: A systematic review. Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, 24(1), 1. doi:10.118612998-016-0084-0 PMID:26798453 International Technology Education Association. (2000). Standards for technological literacy Content for the study of technology. Retrieved from: http://www.iteawww.org James, J. (2007). Student Reaction to Podcast Learning Materials: Preliminary Results. 12th annual Instructional Technology Conference Engaging the Learner. Retrieved from: http://cursos.itesm.mx/ webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab=coursesyurl=/bin/common/course.pl?course_id=_169493_1 Jaschke, S. (2015). Mobile learning applications for technical vocational and engineering education: The use of competence snippets in laboratory courses and industry 4.0. In Proceedings of 2014 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning, ICL 2014, (pp. 605-608). doi:10.1109/ ICL.2014.7017840

61

 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

Krotov, V. (2015). Critical success factors in m -learning: A socio-technical perspective. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 36, 105–126. Kukulska-Hulme, A., & Traxler, J. (2005). Mobile Learning, A Handbook for educators and trainers. New York: Routledge. Lam, J., Yau, J., & Cheung, S. K. S. (2010). A review of mobile learning in the mobile age. In Hybrid learning (pp. 306-315). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-14657-2_28 Laouris, Y. (2005). We need an Educationally Relevant Definition of Mobile Learning. Retrieved from: http://www.mlearn.org.za/papers-full.html Merriam-Webster Dictionary. (n.d.). Retrieved from: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ higher%20education Metcalf, D. (2006). MLearning Mobile Learning and Performance in the Palm of your hand. HRD Press. Milošević, I., Živković, D., Manasijević, D., & Nikolić, D. (2015). The effects of the intended behavior of students in the use of M-learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 207–215. doi:10.1016/j. chb.2015.04.041 Miranda, C. (2007). Hacia un modelo evaluativo de las competencias profesionales en la formación permanente. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación, 41(4), 1-10. Retrieved from: http://www.rieoei. org/1632.htm Posadas, R. (2004). Formación superior basada en competencias, interdisciplinariedad y Trabajo autónomo del estudiante. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación. Retrieved from: http://www.rieoei. org/edu_sup22.htm Proenza, Y., & Leyva, L. M. (2006) Reflexiones acerca de la calidad del aprendizaje y de las competencias matemáticas. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación, 41(1). Quinn, C. (2007). Mobile magic: Think different by design. Presented at Ciclo de conferencias de la Escuela de Graduados en Educación y Centro de Innov@te del Tecnológico de Monterrey.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Reychav, I., Dunaway, M., & Kobayashi, M. (2015). Understanding mobile technology-fit behaviors outside the classroom. Computers & Education, 8, 142–150. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.04.005 Salas, W. (2005). Formación por competencias en educación superior. Una aproximación conceptual a propósito del caso colombiano. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación, (36). Retrieved from: http:// www.rieoei.org/1036salas.htm Stake, R. (2005). Investigación con estudio de casos. Madrid: Ediciones Morata. Stevenson, A., & Waite, M. (Eds.). (2011). Concise Oxford English Dictionary: Book & CD-ROM Set. Oxford University Press. Taharim, N. F., Lokman, A. M., Isa, W. A. R. W. M., & Noor, N. L. M. (2016). Investigating feasibility of mobile learning (M-learning) for history lesson In International colloquium of art and design education research (i-CADER 2014) (pp. 541-550) doi: 10.1007/978-981-287-332-3_55

 Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

Waliński, J. T. (2014). Implementing linguistic landscape investigations with m-learning for intercultural competence development. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 6(2), 15–25. doi:10.4018/ijmbl.2014040102 Yeap, J. A. L., Ramayah, T., & Soto-Acosta, P. (2016). Factors propelling the adoption of m-learning among students in higher education. Electronic Markets. doi:10.100712525-015-0214-x

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Attitude: According to the Cambridge Dictionaries Online, attitude means: A feeling or opinion about something or someone, or a way of behaving that is caused by this. Case Study: Stake (2005) mentions that: “the case study is the study of the particularity and complexity of a particular case, to get to understand their activity in important circumstances” (p. 11). Competence: The Oxford Concise Dictionary defines competence as “the ability to do something successfully or efficiently” (Stevenson & Waite, 2011, p. 1682). However, there are different definitions for competences, mainly because it has been suggested that one broad definition is not suitable for all professions, but they all include the three basic elements: knowledge, skills and attitudes (Innes, Leboeuf-Yde & Walker, 2016). Higher Education: According to Merriam-Webster dictionary a simple definition is: education or learning at a college or university. Full definition is: education beyond the secondary level; especially: education provided by a college or university. Information and Communication Technologies (ICT): This is a term that includes any communication device or application, for example: cellular phones, IPod, tablets, computer and network hardware, also software, satellite systems and so on. It also includes various services and applications associated with them, such as videoconferencing and distance learning (Diethelm & Goschler, 2015). Knowledge: According to the Cambridge Dictionaries Online, knowledge means: understanding of or information about a subject that you get by experienced or by study, either known by one person or by people generally. Mobile Learning (M-Learning): M-Learning is a new learning approach intending to use mobile devices such as laptops, smart phones and personal digital assistants (PDAs) with the purpose of process learning in any place and at any time and its application needs to be designed in a way that it considers the special features and constraints of mobile devices such as screen size, available storage, and processor speed as well as battery life (Al-Harrasi, Al-Khanjari & Sarrab, 2015). Skill: According to the Cambridge Dictionaries Online, skill means: An ability to do an activity or job well, especially because you have practiced it.

This research was previously published in the Handbook of Research on Mobile Devices and Applications in Higher Education Settings edited by Francisco José García-Peñalvo, Laura Briz-Ponce, and Juan Antonio Juanes-Méndez; pages 453-476, copyright year 2016 by Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global).

63

Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

APPENDIX This instrument was applied to each student at the beginning of February 2008. Table 2. Self-administered questionnaire Instructions: Try to answer as honest as possible the following questions. 1. Name: ___________________________________________ 2. Age: ________ years old 3. Gender: F___ M____ 4. Nationality: ____________________ 5. Profession: __________________________________________________ 6. Semester you are in: ______________________ 7. What mobile devices are you using in this course?     Cellular-phone ○ iPod ○ both ○ none of them ○ 8. Do you know how to send text messages?     No ○ Yes ○     If the answer to question No 8 is yes then go to question No 9; if the answer to question No 8 is no, then go to question No 10. 9. How did you learn to send messages from your cell phone?     () Self-learning     () I took a course     () A friend told me how to do it     () Other (specify)_____________________________________ 10. In which way do you think you can learn to send text messages from your cell phone?     () Self-learning     () Taking a course     () I could ask a friend     () Other (specify) _____________________________________ 11. Do you know how to use an iPod?     No ○ Yes ○     If the answer to question 11 is yes, then go to question 12; If the answer to question 11 was no, then go straight to question 13.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

12. How did you learn to use an iPod?     () Self-learning     () I took a course     () A friend told me how to do it     () Other (specify) _____________________________________ 13. In which way do you think you can be able to use an iPod?     () Self-learning     () Taking a course     () I could ask a friend     () Other (specify) _____________________________________ 14 Do you know how to post a Podcast in the iPod?     No ○ Yes ○     If the answer to question 14 is yes, then go to question 15; if the answer was no, then go to question 16. 15 How did you learn how to post a Podcast into the iPod?     () Self-learning     () I took a course     () A friend told me how to do it     () Other (specify) _____________________________________

continues on following page

Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

Table 2. Continued 16. In which way do you think you can learn how to post a Podcast into the iPod?     () Self-learning     () Taking a course     () I could ask a friend     () Other (specify) _____________________________________ 17. Do you use the cell phone and/or the iPod for: (you may choose more than one option)     () Locate and collect information in different electronic and non-electronic sources     () Evaluate information you get from different electronic and non-electronic sources     () Solve problems and make informed decisions in real life and / or the various activities of this course     () Developing individual and collaborative activities for this course     () Other (specify) _____________________________________ 18. With the use of mobile devices as a learning tool in this course your experience was:     () To fear them     () Total satisfaction     () I found it indistinct     () Other (specify) _____________________________________ 19. The use of mobile devices allows you to: (you may choose more than one option)     () Better planning of your activities on the course     () Appropriate interaction and discussion with your team     () Effectively communicate information, concepts, questions and ideas with your peers and / or tutor advisor     () Process data and report results to your teammates and / or advisor tutor     () Other. Explain _____________________________________ 20. What skills do you consider you can develop with the use of mobile devices? (You may choose more than one option)     () Collaborative work     () Leadership     () Self-learning, self-management, self-direction     () Developing creative solutions     () Proactivity, adaptation to change in different social contexts     () Analysis and troubleshooting     () Critical thinking, comparing and contrasting information     () Other. Explain _____________________________________ 21. What advantages and disadvantages do you perceive when using mobile devices in this course? (You may choose more than one option)     () Ease of download and exchange information     () Ease of adaptation to virtual teaching context     () Ease of access to the course content     () Better management of time spent in studying and delivering course activities     () It is updated in the procurement process, exchange of information and knowledge     () Flexibility and comfort with the virtual teaching context     () Other. Explain _____________________________________ 22. What disadvantages and / or limitations may you consider with the use of mobile devices as a resource for learning in this course? Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Designed by the authors.

65

Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

This instrument was applied to students, tutors and advisers during the semester January-May 2008. Table 3. Semi-structured interview No. Question 1. When did the m-learning start at the Tecnológico de Monterrey? 2. Which is the need for using m-learning at the Tecnológico de Monterrey? 3. How the electronic platform from Tecnológico de Monterrey is complemented with the use of m-learning? 4. Was there a pilot project with which m–learning had been tested before it was used for this course? 5. What courses within the curricula of the Educational Master Degree program use mobile devices besides this one? 6. Why do you think this mobile device was used in this program before any other? 7. Who decides the use of m-learning for the curricula? 8. What could be the advantages of using m-learning in this course? 9. What could be the disadvantages of using m-learning in this course? 10. Who provides the mobile devices? 11. Who designs the materials for m-learning? 12. What percentage of the course content is delivered via m-learning? 13. What platform or electronic platforms are used for m-learning? 14. What kind of mobile devices are used in activities that involve m-learning? 15. Do you have access to the digital library from the mobile devices? 16. The materials that are used for m-learning are interactive, static? 17. The materials that are used for m-learning are based on audio, video or both? 18. During the course activities carried out are individual, collaborative or both? 19. The activities carried out are applied in the workplace of the student? 20. The interaction that takes place during the course is made ​​between tutor advisor– student, main advisor-student or student-student? 21. Do the students get some training in handling m -learning devices? 22. Is the student responsible with the use of the m -learning devices? 23. How is the student attitude towards the use of the mobile devices? 24. Do you believe that the use of m-learning devices is useful for enhancing learning and for promoting the students creativity? 25. Do you believe that m-learning devices allow the student to communicate information and ideas effectively? 26. Do the students use the m-learning devices for locate, evaluate, and collect information for the completion of their academic activities? 27. Do the students use the m-learning devices for process data and report results to their peers and advisor?

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Designed by the authors.

Applied Competences for Students by Using M-Learning Devices in Higher Education

This instrument was applied to the observation of teaching-learning processes during each week of the whole semester January-May 2008. Table 4. Observation form Name of the course:

Date:

Structure of the course:

Mobile devices that are used:

Weeks per Term

Total Activities per Week

Activities for Using the Cell Phone

Activities for Using the iPod

Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 Week 7 Week 8 Week 9 Week 10 Week 11 Total % Didactic materials (audio, video, both):

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Designed by the authors.

67

68

Chapter 5

The Effect of Mobile Learning Approach on University Students’ Academic Success for Database Management Systems Course Deniz Mertkan Gezgin Trakya University, Turkey

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

ABSTRACT This article investigates the effect of mobile learning support on students’ academic success on a database management systems (DBMS) course. The research was carried out with 36 students attending a state university in Turkey. In this study, a mixed method was used, which includes both quantitative and qualitative data collection techniques. For the quantitative data, the study was conducted in accordance with the pre-test and post-test-based two group quasi-experimental model. For the qualitative data, the descriptive analysis technique was used. The independent sample t-test and paired simple t-test were employed in the analysis phase. According to the findings, mobile learning positively affected students’ academic achievement on the DBMS course, in that the students supported by mobile learning were more successful than students supported only by face-to-face training method. Finally, it is seen that the students have emphasized themes of motivation, 1-1 access, and an interest in terms of the effect of m-learning approach on academic success.

1. INTRODUCTION Since the early 2000s, mobile devices such as smartphones and tablet pcs, which perhaps best represent today’s rapid development of technology, have been adopted by the worldwide masses as these such mobile devices become more sophisticated, faster and cheaper (Keskin & Kılınç, 2015). In addition to the use of mobile devices in many areas, mobile technologies have fast become a focus of attention in DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-1757-4.ch005

Copyright © 2020, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

 Effect of Mobile Learning Approach on University Students’ Academic Success

education and training activities (Raua, Gaoa, & Wub, 2008). Thanks to the ease of accessibility and portability of mobile technologies, learning activities such as practice and practice in the field of education are carried out both within the classroom and outside the classroom environment (Saran, Seferoglu, & Cagiltay, 2009). In these mobile technology developments, education has become more learner-centred and individualised, as learners’ access to information wherever they are has led to the emergence of the mobile training concept (Sharples, 2000). There are many definitions for the Mobile Learning (m-learning) approach in the field. M-learning is defined as the intersection of mobile informatics and e-learning in order to generate learning experiences anytime and everywhere (Harris, 2001); a learning process that takes place by content interaction or social interaction independent of time and place through the use of mobile devices (Ozan, 2013); any kind of learning attempt where the only or dominant technology is transportable mobile devices (Traxler, 2005); any kind of learning and teaching activity that takes place through mobile devices or mobile environments (Trifonova, 2003); and learning with the help of mobile technologies such as tablet PCs or Notebooks (Yuen & Wang, 2004). M-learning has an increasingly significant role in the development of teaching methods of learning and learning process (Mtega, Bernard, Msungu, & Sanare, 2012), since students can easily and quickly access and use learning resources anytime and anywhere using mobile technology. There are numerous project-based studies using mobile technologies all around the world such as ESF Mobile Learning Project, M-Learning, Educase, BLOOM, MOBILearn, Healthy for Life, Foyer Lifeskills, Merrill Lynch GoLearn, The MoLE, MoLeNET and Increasing the Opportunities and Improving the Technology (FATİH); a national-scale educational technology rollout to all schools in Turkey. Enriching the learning process, moving the learning activity beyond the classroom, designing the learning process according to the learner’s needs are common traits of these education-focussed projects (Bozkurt, 2015). As a result of an examination of the studies in the literature concerning m-learning and its positive academic effect on education, it is seen that m-learning positively contributes to student engagement (Huizenga, Admiraal, Akkerman, & Dam, 2009; Karsenti & Fievez, 2013), learning achievement (Al-Fahad, 2009; Hwang, Wu, & Ke, 2011; Sung & Mayer, 2013; Wu, Hwang, Su, & Huang, 2012; Zaldívar, Tripp, Aguilar, Tovar, & Anguiano, 2015), motivation (Çelik, 2012; Kinash, Brand, & Mathew, 2012; Milošević, Živković, Manasijević, & Nikolić, 2015; Oberer & Erkollar, 2013; Philip & Garcia, 2015; Schwabe & Göth, 2005), interest (Cakir, 2011; Tan & Liu, 2004), attitude (Halder, Halder, & Guha, 2015; Hwang & Chang, 2011; Ozdamli & Uzunboylu, 2015, Uzunboylu, Hürsen, Özütürk, & Demirok, 2015), and critical thinking skills (Cavus & Uzunboylu, 2009). If we examine the studies concerning m-learning in Turkey, it is clear that the attitudes of students and teachers to m-learning (Çelik, 2013; Demir & Akpınar, 2016; Elçiçek & Bahçeci, 2015), and developing m-learning applications and its effect on academic success are the subjects most focused upon. It is stated that mobile learning increases academic success and makes it easier and more fun to learn in abstract and technical subjects (Köse, Koç, & Yücesoy, 2013). According to Sur (2011), it is obvious that mobile learning increases academic success and students have a positive attitude towards mobile learning. In a thesis study on m-learning, an m-learning tool devoted to the basics of a programming class was developed and the tool’s support was found to positively affect the academic success of the students (Dehmenoğlu, 2015). It was also reported that a mobile-based language learning application (MALL), developed by Korkmaz (2010) for the purpose of foreign language teaching, increased the academic success of students. These studies examined the impact of m-learning on academic success in different departments and m-learning was found to positively support students’ academic success. However, a mobile learning application developed for a Database Management Systems (DBMS) course 69

 Effect of Mobile Learning Approach on University Students’ Academic Success

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

of computer or computer programming-based departments could not be found in the literature. Seeing that there are not adequate and appropriate applications in Turkey (Saraç, 2014; Gülbahar, Jacobs & König, 2015; Poyraz, 2014; Özkale & Koç, 2014), Database in My Pocket application will contribute to the application pool. Against this background, it is thought that the use of m-learning approach will increase student motivation and interest, support the engagement of the students to the course, and thus enable the student to develop a positive attitude towards the lecture. In the context of the study, it is a common belief among CEIT students at the teacher education programme that the DBMS course is difficult because this course has a very technical content compared to the other courses at the programme. Therefore, the students often come to the course with negative attitudes. Based on the evidence reported in the literature about the positive impact of m-learning on the student attitudes, it could be thought that mobile learning opportunity might fight against the students’ prejudices against the course. From this point of view, the development and integration of such m-learning applications make the study important in the literature. In addition, since there is a lack of trained teachers in Turkey to use mobile learning (Saraç, 2014), it is also important for CEIT students to have a first-person experience of the m-learning approach as learners in order to use it in their future teaching careers, both formally and informally. Therefore, because students face certain difficulties in learning the DBMS course, an android-based mobile application named ‘Veri Tabanı Cebimde’ (Turkish), meaning ‘Database in my pocket’, was developed in order to understand what kind of impact it would have on the academic success of students. Moreover, there was no m-learning application found devoted to the learning of SQL and T-SQL. The current study will develop an m-learning application and examine the effect of the application’s use on the academic success of students. The primary question driving this current study is ‘Does the use of M-learning software on a database management systems course impact the academic achievement of students?’ In this direction, the research questions are as follows: 1. Is there a meaningful difference between the experimental group and the control group in the pretest scores? 2. Is there a meaningful difference between the pre-test and post-test mean scores of the experimental group in which the m-learning application was used? 3. Is there a meaningful difference between the pre-test and post-test mean scores of the control group in which only the instruction-based teaching method was used? 4. What is the percentage of pre-test and post-test change for students in the experimental and control groups? 5. What are the students’ opinions on the m-learning approach used in DBMS course in terms of their academic success?

1. 1. Pedagogical Framework of M-learning In the m-learning approach, finding ways to integrate mobile devices into learning and teaching activities involves pedagogical aspects. The pedagogical underpinnings are crucial both for the design of the application and the integration of mobile technologies to the learning context. In this respect, the m-learning pedagogical approaches need to be known well for efficient use of m-learning. M-learning

 Effect of Mobile Learning Approach on University Students’ Academic Success

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Figure 1. Pedagogical framework of mobile learning (Ozdamli, 2012)

contains four key aspects of the pedagogical framework; integration of tools, pedagogical approaches, assessment techniques and teacher training (Ozdamli, 2012). Figure 1 shows the basic components of the m-learning. These components are key to the effective use of m-learning. The major pedagogical approaches underlying mobile learning are connectivism theory, constructivism theory, lifelong learning (Peng, Su, Chou, & Tsai, 2009), blended learning (Bonk & Graham, 2006), and collaborative learning (Santangelo, 2009). Among them, especially the theories of connectivism and constructivism have come to the fore as the compatible theories to the process of designing and integrating m-learning (Peng, Su, Chou, & Tsai, 2009; Gunuc, 2017). According to the constructivism theory, the student should be at the centre of the learning and students must engage in social interaction with their peers who actively participate in producing knowledge in order to fulfil their learning (Matthewi, Felvegi & Callaway, 2009). Hence, ‘Database in my pocket’ application is designed to involve opportunities for students to construct knowledge through social interaction. On the other hand, the connectivism theory deals with learning in the social digital world. According to the theory, information is distributed over networks, and learning is about gaining the ability to create and navigate networks (Downes, 2008). In this theory, learners are in direct contact with the source of information through networks instead of simply transferring knowledge. The theory argues that information cannot be transferred from the teacher to students, but rather the participation is important, the information can be the result of active interaction with the individual’s learning resources (Kop, 2011). Gunuc (2017) argues that this theory best explains the m-learning process, and according to Siemens (2004) the theory of connectivism is the theory of the twentieth century. Thus, we adopted this theory in our theoretical framework in order to accommodate the learning process carried out through technology.

71

 Effect of Mobile Learning Approach on University Students’ Academic Success

2. METHODOLOGY 2.1. Design of the Study In this study, a mixed methods approach was adopted. The quantitative data was supported by qualitative data. For the quantitative data, the study was conducted in accordance with the pre-test and post-test based two group quasi-experimental model. One group was designated as the experimental group and the other as the control group. Then, a pre-test was applied to measure the knowledge level of the subjects in both groups (PRc, PRe). As shown in Table 1, an instruction-based teaching programme was applied to both groups; with the experimental group supported by m-learning software (POc, POe). For the qualitative data, the qualitative descriptive analysis technique was used. A semi-structured interview was conducted to obtain students’ opinions about the effect of the m-learning approach on the academic achievement in the DBMS course. The form, which has been based on relevant literature, has been subjected to expert review and edited in accordance with the feedback received.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

2.2. Sampling The study group consists of 3rd grade university students studying in the Department of Computer Education and Instructional Technologies (CEIT) of the Faculty of Education at a state university in Edirne, Turkey, during the spring semester of the 2016-2017 academic years. A total of 43 students were studying in the third spring semester. Three of them did not participate in the study, for they did not have any smartphones. Afterwards, students were initially interviewed with the question “What operating system do you use in your smartphone?” When the results were analyzed, the students appeared to have a smart phone based on either Android or iOS operating systems. Thus, the participants were divided as Android users and IOS users. The study merely focused on the Android users, since the developed m-learning software was Android-based. In other words, it only works on smartphones that use the Android operating system. 22 students were using Android phones, and among them 18 students volunteered to take part in the study as the experimental group. The others, who were using IOS, were adopted as a control group. Thus, the analysis was made with data from 36 students, equally divided into a control group (n=18) and an experimental group (n=18). Students also have taken a basic level of SQL training in the Teaching Information Technologies-I course, which is included in the first grade curriculum in the CEIT section. In this respect, students have basic preliminary information about SQL. Table 2 shows the descriptive statistics of student’s demography. Table 1. The research design Group

Pre-test

Application

Post-test

Control Group

PRC

Face to face training (Instruction-based teaching)

POC

Experimental Group

PRE

Face to face training supported with M-learning

POE

 Effect of Mobile Learning Approach on University Students’ Academic Success

Table 2. Descriptive statistics of students’ demography Gender Female

Male

Experimental Group

8

10

Control Group

9

9

Total (N=36)

17 (%47.22)

19 (%52.78)

2.3. Data Collection Tools An academic achievement test was developed by the researcher in order to measure the success of students in the experimental and control groups. This test has been used both as a pre-test and a post-test. While the test questions were being prepared, opinions of two lecturers were taken in the field of computer programming education, and measurement and evaluation in universities. In addition, test questions were prepared based on the course units of Views, Stored Procedures, Triggers, and Control Structures for the DBMS course. The test consists of 20 multiple-choice items. In the test, ‘5’ points were given for each correct answer and ‘0’ points for incorrect or blank answers. At the end of the application process, open-ended questions were asked in order to retrieve the opinions of the students on the academic achievement of the m-learning approach in the DBMS course. A semi-structured interview protocol prepared by the researcher was directed to the students who were in the experimental group. In addition, the responses given by the participants to the open-ended questions were analysed qualitatively and examined separately by two experts from CEIT department and a statistics expert. At the end of the analysis process, the topics on which the examiners and experts agreed and disagreed were discussed and grouped in specific themes. In this study, the reliability formula proposed by Miles and Huberman (1994) was used for the calculation of the reliability between the two experts (coders). Reliability = Agreement / (Agreement + Disagreement) × 100

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

As a result of the calculation, the reliability of the research is calculated as 80%. Over 70% of the reliability calculations are considered reliable for research (Miles & Huberman, 1994). The obtained result is considered reliable for the given study.

2.4. Data Analysis The study applied descriptive statistics, Independent Sample t-test and Paired simple t-test using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) 23.0 program in order to determine the effect of database teaching supported with m-learning on the academic success of university students for quantitative data. A significance level of 0.05 was used in the tests. The academic success of the students is measured by an achievement test prepared for the DBMS course and it is the dependent variable of the study. The qualitative data was analyzed by the help of descriptive analysis techniques.

73

 Effect of Mobile Learning Approach on University Students’ Academic Success

2.5. Application Phase While only the instruction-based teaching programme was given during the ‘Views, Stored Procedures, Triggers and Control Structure’ units of the Database Management Systems Course to the control group, both the instruction-based teaching programme and teaching supported with an m-learning application were applied to the experimental group. The researchers carried out the instruction in both groups. For the experimental group, the course units were supported with m-learning software in database teaching for a period of four weeks. The entire study took six weeks in total, with a four-week application phase in addition to pre-test and post-test application times. The database course is in the curriculum on week 4. In the application phase, the database course is divided into a different day for experimental and control groups. Experimental and control group students were not in the same class. However, in the implementation process, traditional face-to-face teaching is given in the same way two groups. Therefore, the m-learning application and the control group have not been able to intervene at least in the classroom. Pedagogically, the m-learning software is supported by learning content which includes more audio, pictures, videos and animations. In addition, this m-learning software provides mobile training hold anywhere available. Instant and synchronous communication flow between students and academicians is provided everywhere. Tests containing questions that can be found in audio-visual items and feedbacks are given at any time by the instructors.

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

2.6. ‘Database in My Pocket’ M-learning Application Database in my pocket, an m-learning application, was developed, designed and coded by the researchers to be usable on all mobile devices using Android 4.0 and above (API Level 14 - Ice Cream Sandwich). In this regard, 93% of Android users worldwide would be able to use the application. Only Android-based smartphones were used in the study. The application’s login screen is designed to be simple and quick to access by avoiding mixed menu tabs. There are important brief notes on the main menu of the application that enable students to practice and reinforce through practice. In addition, there are lectures located under the lecture menu, such as Lecture 4 and Lecture 5, which provide visual and audio restructuring through the ‘Lecture Videos’ tab, apart from the individual work opportunities of the students. In addition to these modules, in order to make sure that the students perform adequate exercises, there is an exam section and modules showing the score statistics achieved in these exams. In the Practice section, students are expected to match some terminology and codes that are left intentionally blank. Some images from these sections are shown in Figures 2 and 3. Figure 4 shows the examination, practice and statistics functions of ‘Database in my Pocket’ M-learning Application.

3. FINDINGS 3.1. Quantitative Findings The findings are presented in order of the study’s research questions. First it was tested whether or not the pre-test and post-test scores of the groups showed normal distribution. According to Shapiro-Wilk normality test results, the pre-test and post-test scores of control and experiment groups showed normal

 Effect of Mobile Learning Approach on University Students’ Academic Success

Figure 2. Instruction department of ‘database in my pocket’ m-learning application

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Figure 3. Course function of ‘database in my pocket’ m-learning application

distribution (p>0.05). Second, an independent sample t-test was conducted to determine whether there was a difference in the achievement scores of the groups from the pre-tests. Thirdly, paired sample ttest was conducted in the same groups to determine whether there was a difference in the pre-test and post-test achievement scores separately. Finally, the achievement score differences between the pre-test and post-test of the experimental and control groups were compared with each other. In addition, the analyzes were given in the order of the research questions.

75

 Effect of Mobile Learning Approach on University Students’ Academic Success

Figure 4. Examination, practice and statistics functions of ‘database in my pocket’ m-learning application

Table 3. Independent sample t-test results of pre-tests of experimental and control groups Descriptive Statistic

t-test

N

Mean

SD

t

df

p

Experimental Group

18

61.11

7.96

2.83

34

.00*

Control Group

18

71.11

12.66

Copyright © 2020. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Note. *p