1. Instructional Design
Strategies for Mobile
Application Training
Robert Gibson
Emporia State University

2. Social Media Explained….
• Twitter: “I‟m eating a #donut”
• Facebook: “I like donuts”
• Foursquare: “This is where I eat
donuts”
• Instagram: “Here‟s a vintage
photo of my donut”
• YouTube: “Here I am eating a
donut”
• LinkedIn: “My skills include donut
eating”
• Pinterest: “Here‟s a donut recipe”
• Last FM: “Now listening to
„Donuts‟”
• G+: “I‟m a Google employee who
eats donuts”

3. Presentation Agenda
• eLearning v. mLearning
• Overview of instructional design
models that have been adapted
for mobile
• Examples of application capture
for training and development
• Your turn: Other approaches to
adapting instructional design to
mLearning and mTeaching

4. Objectives
• Identify resources that can be
used in mobile application training
• Successfully apply principals of
instructional design to mobile
application training
• Effectively generate video-based
tutorials for a variety of mobile
devices
• Assess the effectiveness of the
training and resources

5. Key Takeaways
• eLearning v. mLearning
• Problem/Project Based Learning
• Situated Learning
• Challenge-Based Learning
• Digital Apprenticeship
• Application of mLearning within a
variety of ID models
• How to Generate meaningful
mLearning training for faculty and
students

8. eLearning
vs.
mLearning

9. eLearning vs. mLearning
Whereas eLearning addresses
a specific intent to learn
something - in fact the
selection of eLearning is
generally based on a desire to
acquire a specific set of
knowledge or skills -
mLearning is much more
informal, unstructured, opport
unistic, and situated.
Thomas, 2007

10. eLearning vs. mLearning
Situated Learning, also referred
to as Cognitive Apprenticeship
or Socio-Constructivism, is
particularly relevant in
mLearning content delivery.
This theory proposes that
learning is situated in the
activity in which it takes place.
Brown, Collins & Duguid, 1989

11. eLearning vs. mLearning
Discovery v. structured learning –
Piaget & Bruner
Pearce, 2011

12. eLearning vs. mLearning
Much of the appeal of
mLearning is its successful
application to Situated
Learning, Challenge-Based
Learning, and Problem-Based
Learning (PBL) scenarios in
which students use “triggers”
from a problem case or scenario
to define their own learning
objectives.
Wood, 2003

13. Guard Against….
Spending too much time on the
mastery of an application or
overcoming the desire to
engage the application for
purposes other than the
learning objective creates a
distraction known as cognitive
load.
Clark, Nguyen, & Sweller 2006

14. Guard Against….
The so-called novelty effect, in
the context of Human
Performance, is the tendency for
user performance to initially
improve when new technology
is instituted, not because of any
actual improvement in learning
or achievement, but in response
to increased interest in the new
technology.
Clark, 2001

15. Curricular Integration…
• The curriculum needs to
accommodate this new attitude to
learner responsibility for the
approach to learning (e.g., discovery
or situational)
• Successful projects combine the
use of the device to access
curriculum content and produce
student work in a variety of
media, and lessons are planned to
take advantage of both use and
production of content e.g., Problem-
or Challenge-Based Learning

16. Curricular Integration…
• The time taken to manage the
devices, in projects with personal
ownership, takes up very little class
time once the devices are
established, leaving more time for
the wider educational objectives of
the lesson
• Good integration with existing
technologies in the
institution, e.g., interactive
whiteboards, projectors, software
and digital content, aids the smooth
adoption of the devices into routine
teaching and learning

17. Instructional Design
for
mLearning

18. AverTV HDMI Capture

19. Follow-up
•