Arif thesis-dec15'08(final version)

TOWARDS A ROLE FRAMEWORK FOR
MOBILE DEVICES IN EDUCATIONAL CONTEXTS

by

Kazi Arif Anwar

A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements
for the degree of Master of Arts
Department of Curriculum, Teaching and Learning
Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the
University of Toronto

© Copyright by Kazi Arif Anwar (2009)

TOWARDS A ROLE FRAMEWORK FOR
MOBILE DEVICES IN EDUCATIONAL CONTEXTS
Master of Arts, 2009
Kazi Arif Anwar
Department of Curriculum, Teaching and Learning
University of Toronto

Abstract

What is the role of mobile devices in education?

Mobile phone ownership has proliferated at an explosive rate over the last decade. The

entrenchment of this technology in everyday life necessitates a critical examination of the roles it

can play in education. A varied cross-section of case studies in mobile education was selected

and analyzed with the primary aim of providing a critical landscape of mobile education and the

secondary aim of extrapolating frameworks from usage patterns. Exemplar case studies were

reviewed for insight into mobile education and synthesized into a framework using meta-

ethnography. The framework consists of three usage categories: Accessing Learning, Enhancing

Learning, and Managing Learning.

ii

Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge the help and guidance provided by my thesis supervisor,

Professor Jim Slotta as well as the feedback provided by Professor Sarfaroz Niyozov, my thesis

committee member.

iii

Contents

Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... ii
Acknowledgements........................................................................................................................ iii
Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1
Tools ....................................................................................................................................... 1
Mobile Devices ....................................................................................................................... 2
Mobile Phones ........................................................................................................................ 2
Youth appeal. ...................................................................................................................... 4
Challenge for educators. ..................................................................................................... 5
Research Question .................................................................................................................. 6
Definitions........................................................................................................................... 6
Chapter 2: Literature Review.......................................................................................................... 8
Frameworks of Mobile Learning ............................................................................................ 8
Chapter 3: Methodology ............................................................................................................... 13
Meta-Ethnography ................................................................................................................ 13
Initial selection and review. .............................................................................................. 14
Expressing the synthesis. .................................................................................................. 16
Limitations ............................................................................................................................ 16
Chapter 4: Analyses of Case Studies: Accessing Learning .......................................................... 19
Accessing Learning............................................................................................................... 19
Informal health and legal rights education........................................................................ 20
The M-Learning project.................................................................................................... 22
Distance learning through SMS. ....................................................................................... 25
Didactic profiling. ............................................................................................................. 28
Deaf students and SMS..................................................................................................... 30
Discussion. ........................................................................................................................ 32
Chapter 5: Analyses of Case Studies: Enhancing Learning......................................................... 34
Mobile Devices to Enhance Learning................................................................................... 34
Lessons Based on Geo-Referenced Information................................................................... 35
iTree ...................................................................................................................................... 37
Mobile Computer Supported Collaborative Learning .......................................................... 39
ORD-CL............................................................................................................................ 41
High schools...................................................................................................................... 42
Results............................................................................................................................... 44
Participatory Simulations...................................................................................................... 45
Renwick Gallery’s Handheld Education Project .................................................................. 48
Discussion: How is Learning Enhanced? ............................................................................. 50
Chapter 6: Analyses of Case Studies: Managing Learning .......................................................... 54
Managing Learning ............................................................................................................... 54
Mobile Technology in Education Services ........................................................................... 55
Mobile Scaffolding ............................................................................................................... 58
Mobile Organizer for University Students............................................................................ 60
StudyText .............................................................................................................................. 62
Mobile Phones for Assessment ............................................................................................. 63
Discussion. ........................................................................................................................ 65

iv

Chapter 7: Conclusion................................................................................................................... 67
Towards a Role Framework.................................................................................................. 67
The Clear and Present Future................................................................................................ 68
References..................................................................................................................................... 71

Tables

Table 1 Summary of Frameworks................................................................................................. 12
Table 2 Accessing Learning.......................................................................................................... 17
Table 3 Enhancing Learning......................................................................................................... 18
Table 4 Managing Learning.......................................................................................................... 18

Figures

Figure 1. Seven steps of Noblit and Hare’s meta-ethnography.................................................... 13

Appendices

Appendix Glossary........................................................................................................................ 75

v

Chapter 1:
Introduction

The inventor of the system deserves to be ranked among the best
contributors to learning and science, if not the greatest benefactors
of mankind.
Bumstead (1941), on the newly invented
blackboard.

Tools

The invention and intervention of tools in our daily lives are what sparked the headlong

rush of humanity towards what is called modern civilization. The navigation of most aspects of

our lives are eased or enhanced by tools ranging from the rudimentary and functional, to the

sophisticated and convergent. The fields of architecture, agriculture, war and transport have seen

exponential gains thanks to the advances made to their respective tools from developmental

research, trial and error, or simple iterative improvements that come from the passage of time.

Disessa (2001) notes the emblematic role played by tools in society:

They [tools] carry traces of the fundamental values and goals of the community.
They accomplish the jobs that define and justify the very existence of the
community. Tools are badges of membership, symbols of commitment and
accomplishment, frequently tinged with affects such as pride and (for beginners)
embarrassment. (p. 39)

Education is the anomaly; that aspect of our lives that is meant to prepare us to become

model citizens in our tool-enhanced, modern lives, has been relatively non-reliant, even aloof to

increasing technological sophistication for its core tools. A reason for this may be that the

educational dialectic, with the exception of certain technical and vocational sub-categories,

requires only rudimentary tools with limited functionality to fulfill its primary objective, that of

1

2

the transfer, creation and retention of knowledge. Hence the chalkboard, the pencil, the pen and

the notebook, which, while having seen moderate evolution, would be instantly recognizable to a

student from the 19th century even in their modern forms. However, with the increasingly

different needs of a diverse learner body world-wide, as well as the emerging opportunities

provided by data-rich global information networks, the time has come core tools of education to

undergo revolutionary, rather than evolutionary changes.

Mobile Devices

Handheld devices of varying technical capabilities have been a part of the classroom for

at least the last 35 years, when the portable, electronic calculator made its first appearance in

classrooms. The increasing complexity of transistors in modern integrated circuits meant that

more and more power could be expressed in smaller and smaller form factors, leading to

increasingly complex portable electronics. In the last two decades, calculators have been

followed by a range of new mobile devices, notably Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs), Portable

Media Players (PMPs, such as the iPod) and of course, mobile phones. Still, the calculator has

remained the most common mobile, electronic device in educational use, perhaps because of its

relatively low cost, as well as its ease of use.

Mobile Phones

Of the above, the mobile phone in particular has exploded into the mainstream, becoming

perhaps one of the most commonly encountered technologies in daily life. Current estimates put

the number of mobile phones in the world at more than 2 billion and daily sales at about 1

million (Shiffler III, 2008). Even accounting for ownership of multiple phones, these figures

indicate that sooner rather than later, a quarter of the world’s population will possess a mobile

3

phone. Following suit, ownership of personal computers recently hit 1 billion, and with strong

presence in emerging markets this number is expected to double by the year 2014 (Milanesi,

2008). Using this estimation, current sales rates of personal computers come out to about 166

million a year, approximately half of the estimated sales rate for mobile phones.

Increasingly, high-end mobile phones, or Smartphones, possess capabilities comparable

to personal computers such as reading Office documents, email, storing and accessing digital

media, and browsing the Internet (Lee S., Park H. I. 2007). Whether it was a case of the

increasing computational power of mobile phones enabling the expanded capabilities or a need

for greater computational power arising from increased capabilities is an interesting ‘chicken or

the egg’ scenario. It is likely that smart phones arose from a combination of the communicated

needs of the user and a prescience of a market for converged devices on the part of the

manufacturers. Jenkins (2006) describes Convergence as ‘the flow of content across multiple

media platforms’(p. 2), I am extending that definition to include Converged Devices as devices

that subsume the functionalities of multiples devices into them. Some of the better known

converged devices or smart-phones are Apple Inc.’s iPhone and Nokia Corporation’s Nokia N96,

with the latter device combining a 5 mega-pixel camera, a portable media player (PMP) with a

memory capacity of 16 gigabytes, personal productivity and organizer capabilities, a Global

Positioning System, and mobile Internet browsing into a single package. Given that these cell

phones can be prohibitively expensive, ranging from US $ 200 to 1000, not including the cost of

a contract it is not surprising that when having to choose between upgrading their computers and

mobile phones, some users choose the latter.

4

Youth appeal.

A number of explanations have been put forward concerning why such devices,

especially, mobile phones, are so appealing to youth. Rheingold (2002) suggests that the appeal

of mobile phones to youth lies in their ability of be a medium of communication with peers

outside the surveillance of parents and teachers “at the precise time of their lives when they are

separating from their families and asserting their identities as member of a peer group”. Another

factor offered by Rheinhold is the comfort felt by young people in using technology unavailable

when their parents were growing up. Which is consistent the concept of the Digital Native,

defined by Prensky to be the generation born in 1982 and after that are the first to grow up with

digital technology. By the time this generation had begun undergraduate studies (around the age

of 17/18) they would have spent less than 5,000 hour of their lives reading, compared to 10,000

hours having played video-games and 20,000 hours watching TV, all the while surrounded by

and using technology such computer games, email, the Internet, mobile phones and instant

messaging software (Prensky, 2001).

But the innate enjoyment provided by cell phone ownership is not one restricted to digital

natives. The features of being simultaneously available and mobile, two states that were

previously mutually exclusive, provide a flavor of freedom that holds universal appeal. Roos

explains:

The mobile phone allows for almost complete mobility with simultaneous
availability, i.e. the person is in actual reality highly mobile and virtually fixed,
this allows for simultaneous existence in the same person both modern, dynamic,
being-on-the-move person and a very traditional, fixed, non-dynamic, open
communication which used to be completely incompatible. When this is
combined with constant connectedness to the Internet, one can really talk of being
in the centre of a web, operating a communications centre wherever one is. (2001,
p. 10)

5

Challenge for educators.

Given the popularity and pervasiveness of mobile phones in today’s world, how should

educators respond? There are several basic responses that they could take, including prohibiting

the use of mobile phones in schools, a move that is not likely to be received well by digital

natives. A more productive move would be to embrace these technologies and adopt them into

the classroom and beyond. Thankfully, emerging trends in education indicate acceptance rather

than rejection of mobile technologies in the classroom, at least by teachers and students

(Roschelle, 2003).

This acceptance of mobile technologies brings about its own set of challenges, as over-

eager technologists pre-maturely herald the obsolescence of the traditional schooling model and

educationists rush to implement technologies in contexts that might not be best suited for them

Previous epochal technologies have been similarly heralded, from the radio, to television, to the

personal computer, yet none have had the impact in the classroom or learning environments that

was initially predicted or expected from them:

The cycle of attempted change invariably began with extravagant claims of the
revolutionary powers of film or instructional television to transform teaching and
learning. Reformers, including public officials, vendors foundation executives and
school administrators, fastened onto the new technology, promoting it as a
solution for school problems. For example, in the 1950’s promoters of
instructional television hailed that new technology as a solution to a teacher
shortage at the time. (Cuban, 2001, p. 137)

Although in the era of mobile communications it may seem that these previous fallacies

of unrealistic expectations are being repeated, mobile technology may prove an exception to the

rule because of two important factors that differentiate it from previous technologies such as

television, radio and personal computers. The first is that mobile technologies, by definition, are

mobile, and the second is that mobile technology is ubiquitous, and as likely to be owned by the

6

learners as opposed to the institutions. Mobile devices also integrate (with varying degrees of

success) all of the main features of previous technologies: Radio is aural, but not visual,

Television is aural and visual, but not interactive, personal computers are aural, visual and

interactive, but not portable. Mobile devices combine all of the above qualities into a small form

factor, while also ensuring through their ubiquity that the learning curve for new users is

minimal. Mobile learning, we can conclude, has real potential to become an integral part of the

educational discourse.

Research Question

What patterns of usage are emerging for mobile devices in educational contexts?

The line of inquiry that was employed to address this question was a two-step process of

critical analyses of mobile learning case studies followed by a meta-ethnographical synthesis of

the findings. The expected outcome is a clearer understanding, for the reader, of the direction of

mobile learning, in addition to its perceived and emergent strengths and challenges. It is also

hoped that the patterns of usage that are revealed will better inform efforts to establish a

comprehensive and general framework for mobile devices in educational settings.

Definitions.

The term Mobile Learning, or M-learning has as many definitions as it has examples.

Some definitions focus on the technology or medium of delivery, some focus on the mutability

of the learning context, and some focus on the learning activities in question. Although a

comprehensive definition would almost certainly comprise of all of the above criteria

proportionally, what remains constant is the medium of delivery. This medium may be a

hardware or a software solution, or both, but it is constant, and it is integral to any definition of

7

m-learning. Although the instinctive conceptual association with the word ‘device’ is that of a

physical object, the definition of the word encompasses ideas and strategies as well. This

afforded ambiguity needs to be extended to the usage of the words ‘mobile device’ in this paper.

Chapter 2:
Literature Review

What is evident…is the need for conceptual frameworks to guide
the design of learning-centered educational environments that best
exploit mobile and wireless devices.
(Cobcroft, Towers, Smith, & Bruns, 2006)

Frameworks of Mobile Learning

The reasons behind the abundance of definitions and frameworks for mobile-learning (m-

learning) lie more with the relative newness of the field rather than with confusion arising from

an inherent complexity. Given that effective activities draw on a number of distinct theories and

practices, Naismith, Sharples & Ting (2005) argue the need for a blended approach. Thus, their

framework classifies m-learning into six broad theory-based categories of activity:

1. Behaviourist – Activities that promote learning as a change in the learner’s

observable actions

2. Constructivist – Activities in which learners actively construct new ideas or concepts

based on both their previous and current knowledge.

3. Situated – Activities that promote learning within an authentic context and culture.

4. Collaborative – Activities that promote learning through social interaction.

5. Informal and lifelong – Activities that support learning outside dedicated learning

environment and curriculum.

6. Learning and Teaching support – Activities that assist in the coordination of learners

8

9

and resources for learning activities. (Naismith, Sharples, & Ting, 2005)

Frohberg (2006) discusses the problems with Naismith’s pedagogy-based framework:

First, the pedagogy within a mobile learning project is not as stable as one would
assume. Even small changes in the design might shift the project into another
category without having changed anything significant. Second, the categories are
not sufficiently distinct. A mobile learning project can for example be
collaborative, situated, and informal at the same time, which makes it impossible
to place a project clearly in one specific category. (p. 2)

Frohberg (2006) suggests that context takes precedence over the specific activity being

performed during the learning process, as it allows for better customization of technology. He

arrived at this conclusion from his analysis of 120 projects, which he sorted into five contextual

categories: Free, meaning activities where context is irrelevant, these comprise of non-traditional

learning contexts, examples include tour buses, public transportation, restaurants. Formalized,

where learning occurs within a traditional curriculum characterized as structured and well

defined, as typically offered in most learning institutions. Digital or a virtual context set by

computers that replace a physical context. Physical, where learning takes place in a real

environment which is situated, cooperative and explorative, and Informal, which is best

described as ‘everyday learning’, where the learning situation is not necessarily anticipated or

structured by pre-meditated or external curricula. Social skills and other ‘soft’ skills are included

in this category.

Frohberg’s (2006) argument for a contextual framework for m-learning is compelling, as

change in context is, after all, an indicator of mobility. However, Frohberg’s framework is

vulnerable to one of the same charges that he levels at the framework of Naismith et al. (2005),

which is the instability of these categories. It can be argued that as a student goes about a school

day, he or she moves across a number of learning contexts, from Formalized learning in the

10

History classroom to the social cues picked up in the school cafeteria. Frohberg thus appears

handicap his own framework by arguing that stability is a desirable trait in frameworks. But

perhaps stability is not as important as Frohberg has implied. After all, overlap in categorization

schemes is common, this holds even more so for education.

Patten, Sánchez, & Tangney (2006) propose a framework that moves away from the

conceptual end of the spectrum in favor of the pragmatic end. Patten et al. focus specifically on

the applications of handheld or mobile devices in education, and find seven functional

categories:

1. Administrative – Generally focusing on information management tasks such as

scheduling, calendars, and grading.

2. Reference – Office style tools such as dictionaries, translators and other e-books.

3. Interactive – Applications that engage the user through a ‘response and feedback’

approach. Includes drills and testing.

4. Micro worlds – Small-scale recreation of real-world domains to allow for the learner

to experiment and construct their own knowledge.

5. Data collection – Applications that make use of the information recording and storage

abilities of handheld devices.

6. Location Aware – Applications that allow for learners to contextualize their learning

activities by recognizing their location, through use of technologies such as GPS.

11

7. Collaborative – Building on the previous categories, these applications aim to recreate

a learning environment that are inspired by and encourage collaborative learning.

The respective frameworks of Naismith et al. (2006), Frohberg (2006) and Patten et al.

(2006) share a division of m-learning into at least 5 distinct categories. However, the question

needs to be asked whether mobile learning design is better guided by relatively complex,

categorical schemes or relatively simple ones? This paper will argue that there is a need for both.

It is important to remember the relative infancy of the field of mobile learning as we explore the

reasons behind the lack of any overarching frameworks. Kukulska-Hulme’s (2005) review of ten

innovative case studies in mobile learning identified three general categories of usage for mobile

learning in the learning space, specifically that the categories of usage for mobile devices are to

provide access, to enable changes in teaching and learning, and to provide alignment with

institutional or business aims.

Although these three categories are not offered as the foundation of an overarching

framework for m-learning, they have the potential to be used as such. The first two categories,

providing access and enabling innovation, may well be critical categories of usage that can

describe the field of mobile learning today. However, the third category, alignment with

institutional of business aims, may be what prevents Kukulska-Hulme’s category scheme from

serving as a comprehensive, over-arching framework. Unlike the first two categories, it is not

required to share any pedagogical objectives, and it nearly begs the question of whether a mobile

project should be sanctioned or disregarded if it is not alignment with institutional or business

aims. Assuming the answer is ‘no’, then Kukulska-Hulme’s third category of usage becomes

redundant. Thus, there remains the need for a comprehensive and overarching framework for the

usage of mobile-devices in learning contexts that can serve as a general guide for designers, a

12

planning tool for deployers and users, and as a classification scheme for scholars. Table 1

provides a convenient summary of these frameworks of mobile learning.

Table 1
Summary of Frameworks

Frameworks of mobile learning Framework

Naismith Theory based categories of activity

Frohberg Context based categories

Patten Functional categories of usage

Kukulska-Hulme General categories of usage

Chapter 3:
Methodology

Meta-Ethnography1

Given that one of the goals of this paper was to provide an interpretive synthesis of

existing research on m-learning, this raises a challenge in selecting a method of analysis –

particularly given the wide range of quantitative and qualitative studies to be examined. Meta-

analysis, or the analysis of combined quantitative findings, would be inapplicable given the

predominance of qualitative case studies. Thus, a qualitative synthesis, or meta-ethnography, is a

better alternative. This study followed the model established by Britten, Campbell, Pope,

Donovan, Morgan, & Pill (2002), who applied the Noblit and Hare (1988) approach to meta-

ethnography to create a qualitative synthesis of articles on Social Medicine. Figure 1 details

Noblit & Hare’s (1988) 7-step meta-ethnographical approach.

1. Getting started
2. Deciding what is relevant to the initial interest
3. Reading the studies
4. Determining how the studies are related
5. Translating the studies into one another
6. Synthesizing translations
7. Expressing the synthesis

Figure 1. Seven steps of Noblit and Hare’s meta-ethnography.

1
The author understands that the long-standing association of the word ethnography with descriptive sociological
studies can create confusion for the reader. It should therefore be noted that the use of the term meta-ethnography in
this thesis refers to the methodology of synthesizing multiple, disparate qualitative studies sharing the same general
subject matter, in this case, mobile-learning.

13

14

Given the simplicity and redundancy of some of these steps the description of the

methodology has been condensed into two sections, the first being an amalgamation of the first 6

steps called Initial Selection and Review and the second being the 7th step: Expressing the

Synthesis.

Initial selection and review.

The articles to be synthesized were selected from a variety of sources, ranging from

commissioned studies to independent experimental undertaking. All of the articles cited, not only

projects but also the supporting references were obtained using Google Scholar, an online search

engine for scholarly literature provided as a service by Google Inc. Search results in Google

Scholar are ranked according to a number of factors, mainly, relevance of text content and

citations in other scholarly literature. These rankings were used in determining the relevance of

different resources within the analysis.

The query words were selected as they defined the three most important criteria for

inclusion: that learning experience be on the move, that a certain level of technology be

employed and the experience itself relate to counterparts in traditional education. Thus, the

articles were selected from the first 600 results from the search query ‘mobile technology

education.’. Following the search results, the author selected articles based on the short blurbs on

each article provided by the search result page. The criteria for inclusion were that the paper

would have to describe a mobile learning project that involved the use of mobile devices. Out of

approximately the first 600 results, 158 were selected for review. Subsequent review of the

papers by the author resulted in some papers being discarded for irrelevance or redundancy.

Where possible, papers described but unavailable through Google Scholar were obtained by

directly contacting the authors via electronic mail.

15

The initial list of 600 results returned from Google Scholar were reduced to a pool of 158

by reading the respective abstracts and determining whether the articles actually dealt with the

topic of mobile devices usage in educational contexts. This was necessary as even though the

search query of ‘mobile, technology, education’ were sufficient to return a large number of

relevant articles, there were a sufficient number of un-related articles that made a thorough

review of each abstract necessary.

The 158 studies selected for review were carefully read to first identify the main

concepts. Following each reading, detailed notes identifying the main concepts as well as unique

features were made. Papers were read with an effort to shift between different m-learning

approaches and research methodologies. Notes were taken during the reading, with an emphasis

on identifying central themes and with other papers. Not all of the 158 articles selected dealt

specifically with case studies of mobile device usage in educational contexts, many articles in

fact dealt with peripheral topics such as the history of technology in education or technical

matters such as mobile software development for education. These papers, although not included

for review, were nonetheless used to fill-in the author’s gaps in knowledge. Out of the pool of

158, 86 articles dealt with case studies of mobile devices in education, the remaining 72 were

either theoretical or technical papers that were nonetheless used as reference. From these 86 case

studies, 15 were selected for review in this paper. The criteria for selection were that the paper

would have to exemplify the emerging categories of usage (described below), and that it was an

innovative application of the use of mobile device in educational contexts. This was done in a

completely arbitrary manner.

Three recurring roles for mobile devices emerged over the course of the reading:

Accessing Learning, Enhancing Learning and Managing Learning. In order to relate the studies

16

to another, tables were created for each category using columns to represent targeted learners,

technology used and learning contexts respectively. Each article falling into a particular category

was represented by a row in the table. In order for key themes to emerge from each category, a

set of common traits had to be established. These are key details that allowed for a profile of

each study to be established. For each category, the common traits were fixed as targeted

learners, technology used and learning context.

Expressing the synthesis.

Comparing the studies across the set of commonalities was necessary to determine what

the researchers were hoping to achieve with the use of the specific mobile devices they were

investigating. The following questions that were asked: What is the aim of the study? Is the

mobile device making a meaningful difference in the educational discourse, and if yes, what

specific role is it playing? The roles identified for mobile devices were generalized, leading to

the articulation of three overarching categories: Accessing Learning, Enhancing Learning and

Managing Learning. Table 2 provides an overview of the 15 papers that ultimately comprised the

dataset used to articulate these categories, displaying the author names, targeted learners, specific

mobile technologies employed and learning context.

Limitations

In retrospect the author feels that the initial stages of the article selection process could

have been subjected a more disciplined and comprehensive approach. A greater pool of papers

could have been obtained by using alternative query strings such as ‘learning’, ‘handhelds’, and

‘portable’. Search engines other than Google Scholar may also have been used to access

additional sources of scholarly content. Ultimately, the factor that primarily limited the scope of

17

the author’s search efforts was time. It would of course be preferable that the case studies

reviewed here are ‘best of breed’, but a pool of ‘best of breed’ studies is not necessarily a by-

product of a methodology focused on identification of themes from a random cross-section of

studies. Although it is interesting to speculate about the results from an alternative pool of

papers, the universality of the themes that emerged from this exercise provide the author with

confidence that he would have arrived at the same conclusion.

Overview of Studies

Tables 2, 3, and 4 provide overviews of the final pool of studies selected for analysis and

critique in subsequent chapters.

Table 2
Accessing Learning

Authors Targeted learners Technology used Learning context

Sandhu, 2005 Migrant workers Mobile phones Health and legal rights

Attewell, 2005 Disaffected youth, young Mobile phones (SMS, Literacy, numeracy and life-
vulnerable learners web) skills modules

Islam, 2005 Geographically remote Mobile phones (SMS) Mathematics
students

Becking, 2005 Working students PDA General

Akamatsu, 2006 Deaf students Mobile phones (SMS) Communications

18

Table 3
Enhancing Learning


Giroux, 2002 K-7, 12-13 years old Mobile phones, GPS On-site archeology, history
units

Nakahara, 2005 Undergraduate Mobile phones BBS forums postings

Zurita, 2004 K-2, K-11, K-12 Mobile phones, PDA Word-learning, number
ordering and natural sciences

Klopfer, 2005 Diverse PDA (Palm) Simulation of complex,
dynamic systems

Boehner, 2005 Diverse PDA (Compaq) Museum guide

Table 4
Managing Learning


Chen, 2005 Undergraduate and post- Mobile phones Educational services
graduate (Web)

Stone, 2002 Undergraduate Phones (SMS) Mobile educational

support (scaffolding)

Corlett, 2005 Post-graduate PDA (Compaq) Calendars, concept-

mapping tools

Mellow, 2005 Mobile phones Digital flash cards

Whattanarong, 2004 Undergraduate Mobile phones (voice Assessment

and SMS)

Chapter 4:
Analyses of Case Studies:
Accessing Learning

The justification of mobile learning and a solid foundation for this
new sector of provision comes from the ‘law’ of distance research
which states that ‘It is not technologies with inherent pedagogical
qualities that are successful in distance education, but technologies
that are generally available to citizens’.
(Keegan, 2005)

Accessing Learning

The mobile device is used as a tool that lowers the barrier of entry to education for a

learner who faces constraints due to limitations such as physical ability, monetary resources, or

geographical distance.

We live in a world that simultaneously more connected and isolated than ever. Jet travel

has reduced a trip around the world to only 24 hours, cable news networks report on events

happening around the world as it happens, telecommunications satellites mean instant

communications with anyone on the planet with access to a phone, the Internet provides

universal information access regardless of location. Yet, the gap between the rich and the poor is

increasing, ethnic tensions, even in countries with stable and democratic governments such as

Belgium are rising, and steady migration to cities means rural dwellers are being left even further

behind in terms of economic development and technological infrastructure. With expanding

populations in developing countries and increased immigration to developed countries demand

for basic services such as education is rising.

19

20

Especially in the case of education, the ability, scope and desire for customization of

curricula is inversely related to demand. Administrators often find themselves choosing between

a more flexible learning experience to one that is comparatively rigid but able to address the

needs of a larger student body. However, increased student populations also means increased

student diversity, including those that face challenges in terms of learning ability, physical

ability, geographical distance, and of course, socio-economic background. These students are

often the ones whose quality of life is affected more significantly by access to education. Clearly,

a bridge is required to connect these learners to educational resources available to the wider, and

more homogenous, student body. This role can by played strongly by technology. In particular,

the technology represented by mobile phones, which is unlike any other introduced in the last

hundred years in that, through its ubiquity, it has become the most democratic technology

platform in the world. In other words, in terms of accessibility to technology, the mobile phone is

the lowest common denominator.

Informal health and legal rights education.

Mobile devices enable targeting of non-traditional learner groups and dissemination of

non-traditional curricula, as exemplified by Sandhu, Hey, & Agogino (2005). The researchers

addressed the needs of migrant workers in the western and southern United States in terms of

awareness of their informal legal and health rights, and sought to address the issue by first

studying the demographic composition of migrant workers in the United States. The findings

conveyed that despite conventional wisdom, this group is not homogenous:

Approximately 80% of farm workers are foreign-born and the overwhelming
majority of these (95%) were born in Mexico. Still, many other populations
participate in agricultural work, including Native Americans, Jamaicans, Laotians,
Filipinos, Haitians, Puerto Ricans, and Hmongs [8]. Spanish is the native tongue
for 84% of this population, English represents 12% and Tagalog, Ilocano, Creole,
and Mixtec comprising most of the rest.2 Literacy is decidedly low as 85% of

21

farmworkers are unable to decode printed information in either their native or
adopted language. Tremendous income inequalities distinguish this group from
the rest of the U.S. population; compared to the per capita GDP of more than
US$37,000, half of all farmworker families earn less than US$10,000 annually. (p.
1)

Given the challenges in terms of language, immigration status and general obstacles

faced by migrant workers (with many not having legal residence status), it is not surprising that

this population is often deprived of the legal and health rights that are ensured to them. Sandhu et

al. sought to utilize this community’s access to and use of cell phones to conduct a preliminary

needs assessment for health and legal rights education. The project was based on the concept of

the sharing of ICT resources, and the authors point out similar endeavours that have been in

place in South Asia for some time now. Including the Grameen Phone project in Bangladesh,

which allowed for (mostly) women entrepreneurs operating cell phone services in rural contexts

and India Tobacco Company’s (ITC) e-choupals, which provided a virtual marketplace for rural

farmers (p. 2).

Given that sharing of community resources was an imperative in this design, the

researchers took care to involve the community in the design of the project. Migrant worker

community members from the town of Earlimart, California were chosen to conduct an initial,

‘innovation workshop’, this workshop consisted of needs assessment, brainstorming and concept

development sessions (Sandhu et al., 2005, p. 3). The main needs that emerged from the

development session were focused around health and information. Among others, main concerns

centered around pesticides and water contamination. It was the findings to this session that

confirmed to the researchers the effectiveness of a solution based around mobile technology. The

researchers make a number of suggestions in terms of design for a mobile solution for the needs

22

of the migrant worker community. Sandhu et al. also add the caveat that mobile technology is

only one of the solutions that were being investigated.

The economics of any proposed system are critical to its successful adoption and
continued use. Any system level research in the area of technology and education
must have a viable, sustainable business model. A stronger claim is that there
must be some market-driven need for the technology in order for it to have a
chance at long-term viability. This is not a central focus of our work at this stage,
but it is a consideration. This is the reason for leveraging existing mobile
telephone networks and for examining a technology that has already found
footing in the community. (Sandhu et al., 2005 p. 4)

Upon contacting the primary researcher, the author was informed that the work on the

project had not progressed further, presumably due to a lack of funding. While the

discontinuation of the project is unfortunate, Sandhu et al. (2005) do raise a valid scenario where

the effective utilization of a community resource makes a meaningful difference in the quality of

community members’ lives. In this case the resource is ICT, specifically mobile phones.

This study provides a good illustration and anchor point in our analysis of the access

category. It demonstrates the potential of mobile technologies for providing resources to a group

that is traditionally on the wrong side of the digital divide. This potential seems most connected

to the attribute of mobile phones that they are the lowest common denominator in terms of

accessible technology. Hope remains that future projects deploying a similar design will be more

successful in terms of attracting the necessary funding to see them through to completion.

The M-Learning project.

Attewell (2005) describes the M-Learning project as one that takes advantage of a

common technology available to the overwhelming majority of European Union youth in the 16-

20 age group: the mobile phone. The researchers assert that this age group is the most vulnerable

to disengagement from learning. The authors also cite the International Adult Literacy Survey

23

from 1997 which indicated that 20% of adults in the UK had a literacy level less than that

expected of an 11 year old, and that 6% of students who left school at the age of 16 do not go on

to subsequent training or work. Compelled by these rather grim statistics, the authors partnered

with 14 other organizations working with vulnerable youth in the UK to study the best ways of

reaching them through the advent of mobile phones. The collaborating institutions worked with

the following groups:

1. Homeless

2. Modern Apprentices

3. Afro-Caribbean young people not interested in learning

4. Family learning including young fathers

5. Unemployed, disadvantaged

6. Travelers, homeless, young mothers

7. Reluctant students

8. Unemployed, young offenders

9. School pupils including potential drop-outs

10. Disadvantaged youth

11. Immigrants and dialect speakers. (Attewell, 2005, p. 3)

The authors worked with the collaborating partners to find the best approaches to

developing mobile learning modules that would take into account delivery options, technology

platform (operating systems), programming language and media and transport options

(Bluetooth, Wi-fi). The underlying hypothesis behind this project was the assumption that

handheld devices could be used for learning and that it was an avenue of attracting young people

24

who did not enjoy traditional education. Based on this hypothesis, a number of mobile learning

materials were developed for the target groups:

1. Smaller-than-bite-sized literacy, numeracy and life skills modules available both

offline or online via the web browser and the learning management system (LMS)

2. Driving theory test quizzes (JAVA based and downloadable)

3. SMS quizzes linked to text-based materials and Mini-SMS language course (basic

Italian)

4. Mini web-page builder. (Attewell, 2005, p. 4)

While no formal findings were available at the time this paper was written, anecdotal accounts

from mentors implementing the project indicated individuals who were more confident in

graduating to more complex technology and more engaged and confident in learning as a result

of the study. The authors warn that the period of engagement provided to the 300 learners by

their collaborating organizations was only between 3-9 weeks, a period of time insufficient to

investigate long-term effects on numeracy and literacy of the target groups. However, as is often

the case with broad studies, it is the unanticipated results that are the more interesting, including

the one here that highlights the complex psycho-social impact of democratic technological

access:

Some positive outcomes not directly related to learning have also been reported.
Some of the learners were surprised and proud to be trusted with such expensive
and sophisticated technology; for example, one project mentor noted: ‘He took
really good care of it. He pointed out that because of his background, no one else
would have ever trusted him with a mobile. This has meant more to him than the
actual device itself as he feels respected. (Attewell, 2005, p. 6)

25

Disaffected youth and disadvantaged migrant populations are not solely a developing

world phenomenon, and the m-learning project makes an admirable attempt to reach these

sectors of the population. Although mobile phones are a good bridge to these populations, more

emphasis should be placed on what life-skills are actually in the best interests of the

stakeholders. What work have the researchers done to ensure that appropriate and relevant life-

skills are being made available? Were there surveys to gauge what topics the target group

interest? The project is frustratingly vague on this very important topic. With the establishment

of the appropriate tools for this project let’s hope appropriate goals follow not far behind.

Distance learning through SMS.

One of the challenges in terms of education for developing countries is ensuring access

for all learners. These learners may be considered disadvantaged not only by socio-economic

status but by geographical location as well. Bangladesh, which is still in the process of

developing a comprehensive nation-wide transportation system, is all too aware of these

challenges. Although traditional correspondence-distance education is available in Bangladesh,

Islam, Ashraf, Rahman, & Rahman (2004) point out that the list of shortcomings with this

traditional model is extensive, for one, they are not live, there is a lack of interaction between the

presenter and the student, there is no feedback or monitoring, and most importantly, there is no

evaluation of teaching quality.

According to the authors, the missing link or the crucial advantage that traditional

education holds over distance education is interactivity. With recent advances in technology,

these issues have been resolved to a degree. Distance education classes in many universities now

webcast classes and allow for students to video-conference with the teacher in real-time.

However, the high-bandwidth networks and expensive equipment required for these formats

26

preclude their use in developing countries, which often have low bandwidth or unreliable

Internet connections, and limited budgets to invest in expensive computer equipment. As a

remedy, Islam et al. (2004) point out that the rapidly expanding mobile phone user-base in

Bangladesh can be used as an alternative:

The phenomenal growth of mobile phones is expected to continue with each
mobile company setting their targets in terms of millions. With new companies
like BTTB and Alcatel joining competition, the unit prices of calls and sending
messages are also expected to drop. The companies now cover all districts of
Bangladesh. If mobile phone technology could be used as a tool, it would be
much more technologically suitable for Bangladesh in terms of the reach it would
provide. (p. 2)

Here is where the authors create a marriage that seems to have a unique potential of being

a model for distance education that is effective in terms of both cost and pedagogy. They propose

using the traditional Open University format, which is used by the Bangladesh Government to

broadcast traditional educational programs over the national television channel. They then add an

innovative use of m-learning in the form of an SMS (Short Messaging Service), a term

sometimes used to refer to text messages or IM) channel where students can provide immediate

responses to questions from a live, televised class. The idea here is to provide a more visceral,

engaging educational experience for students who have traditionally been more passive

consumers of such educational content. and the impact of this added innovation would be

evaluated, as would the students’ achievement in the educational courses, through tests taken

subsequently at examination centers. Islam claims that the rapid growth of cell phones and SMS

users in Bangladesh bolsters the medium's promise as a distance learning tool that will support

distributed learning by enabling the following:

1. Delivery of contents,

2. Regular communications,

27

3. Continuous feedback and

4. Interactions between learners and instructors. (Islam et al., 2004, p. 2)

To test the effectiveness of cell phones as distance learning tools, Islam et al. (2004) set

up two classrooms side by side, one with an instructor present and the other receiving a live

video broadcast from the instructor's classroom. Each classroom had 26 students, and the

classroom with no instructor used cell phones and text messages (SMSs) instead of pen and

pencil to answers the same questions in a mathematics context of quadratic functions. The marks

achieved in both classrooms were compared statistically, and it was found that the mobile group

in general scored significantly higher than the f2f (face to face) group. Islam speculates that this

may be due to the initial flurry of excitement over the new method being used, and that this may

wear off after the initial few classes.

Although Islam et al. (2004) propose a creative and viable solution for distance education

in developing countries such as Bangladesh, their specific use scenarios could be more flexible.

For example, they suggest a number of uses of SMS connectivity for remote students, including

reminding the student when he or she has not participated for some time, or establishing a

mandatory number of questions that need to be answered per class. This, in the author’s view, is

an application of SMS technology in the traditional, transmissional mode of teaching often

encountered in developing settings. The question that needs to be asked is if there is scope for

discursive models of teaching with cell phone based education? Using SMSs also limits the types

of subjects that can be taught, how are essay type questions going to be handled in this model?

This scenario of a new technology replicating the mode of consumption of its predecessor is not

new, after all, with the initial introduction of televisions most channels simply broadcast pre-

28

recorded stage-plays. However, there are unique opportunities that SMS-based distance learning

opens up, and they should be explored and embraced with imagination.

Didactic profiling.

Correspondence or distance education does not exclusively cater to the needs of learners

who are geographically distant. Professionals and other individuals who are dependent on hourly

salaries often have to choose between continuing education and continuing their livelihoods.

Becking, Betermieux, Bomsdorf,, Feldman, Heuel, Langer, & Schlageter (2005) describe a

project to bring such learners into the educational fold of the Virtual University, a subsidiary of

the University of Hagen in Denmark. The idea is to utilize effectively the blocks of ‘nothing’

time that we all encounter in our daily lives, such as waiting for a flight, commuting, or a lunch

hour that ends early. The authors state their goal as making available learning materials to the

students during these open but unanticipated blocks of time so that they can more effectively

leverage their spare time.

To make clear the differences between mobile learning in distance education and
in on campus education one has to bear the difficult situations of our learners in
mind. Our students frequently get into situations where they could learn if only
they had learning material at hand. Mothers who bring up children have to wait in
a paediatrist's waiting room or spend hours sitting on a park bench keeping an eye
on their children in the playground. Part-time students working as salesmen spend
a lot of time driving from one customer to another either on a train or in their own
car. (p. 2)

Becking et al. (2005) take care to delineate both the advantages as well as the challenges

facing mobile learning. Although mobile learning gives learners flexibility in terms of location

independence and self-management of learning, it also introduces new challenges that make

curriculum development difficult. One is that despite the exciting learning opportunities opened

up by mobile learning, they lack the predictability, stability and guaranteed access to learning

29

materials that characterize traditional learning environments. A remedy for this is to provide

students access to learning resources through the advent of a mobile device, which, in this case,

is a Personal Digital Assistant (PDA). However, while this allows for the learner to become

location independent, the effect of the environment remains. Becking et al. note that both the

mobile device being used and the learner using it are constrained by their context. The mobile

device may have varying access to network bandwidth and response times based on its location,

and the learner, among other things, may or may not be able to concentrate fully on the learning

materials at hand depending on the context.

These factors, the Becking et al. contend, need to be considered so that the learning

management system they propose can optimize the learning experience. To this end, the authors

propose the development of a two-pronged profiling software model for these experiences:

Technical profiling and Didactic profiling, with the former dealing with the technical resources

available to the device and the latter with the learning context of the learner. Of the two, it is

didactic profiling that is innovative and deserving of further investigation. According to Becking

et al., didactic profiling takes into the ‘strong’ impact of environmental conditions on mobile

learning. The aspects of mobile learning taken into consideration include:

1. Learner's qualifications and requirements,

2. Taxonomy of instructional/learning goals

3. Methodology of teaching

4. Communication/collaboration settings

5. Learner’s progress and learning history

30

Becking et al. further expand this didactic profiling system into four main clusters, which,

when combined with the technical profile, allows the learning management system to create a

dynamic profile of the learning environment in terms of both device and learner needs. The four

clusters identified by the authors are, situation, learner, learning objects and participation. A

further subdivision of these clusters reveals more factors affecting the learning situation as being,

frequency of interference, level of concentration/distraction, instruction goals and session

identification (individual/partner/group).

This project is one that takes an indirect approach to providing access, the researchers

recognized that simply providing the tools to allow for mobile learning is not sufficient, it is

critical to consider the context and the environmental impact on the learner and the mobile

device. At the time of writing this project was still in development as a software project.

Although it might not directly affect learning mobile learning, the incorporation of this model

into other mobile learning solution is worth exploring for mobile learning developers.

Deaf students and SMS.

One dramatic impact of mobile devices in terms of providing access can be seen in those

struggling with physical disabilities, especially in school settings, where peer interaction is

critical in social development. Mobile devices, with their availability and general social

familiarity, can be an ideal tool to bridge these students to their non-disabled peers. Akamatsu,

Mayer, & Farrelly (2006) decided to investigate one such group, deaf students in secondary

school in Toronto Canada. According to the authors, while deaf students raised by deaf parents

exhibit better social development given their parents’ advantage in sign language

communications, these students are in the minority, at about 5% of the total deaf population.

Because many of the modern communications systems pre-suppose that the users are hearing

31

enabled, new challenges are introduced for parents with deaf children in terms of keeping in

touch. One of the stated factors behind the researchers choice of two-way text messaging as the

technology solution was the number of anecdotal reports citing the rise in text messaging in deaf

populations, thus “it would be reasonable to expect that the same positive benefits would accrue

to students at the secondary level” (Akamatsu et al., 2006, p. 5). The researchers proposed using

two-way text messaging as a way to bridge deaf students to their parents as well as peers, by

framing the usage in terms of three main research questions:

1. Will the students use two-way text messagers and to what extent?

2. Is the students’ independence affected by text-messaging use?

3. What is the level of satisfaction with two-way messaging for students and parents?

The study itself took place at two large inner-city public schools under the jurisdiction of

the Toronto District School Board, both schools featured deaf education departments that were

staffed by specialist teachers, interpreters and educational assistants, with an average student

body of 30-40 students throughout the school year. These students reflected the cultural variety

of Toronto in that they represented a number of different communities. Adding to the challenge

for the children in question were that in many of the homes English was not the spoken language,

and the parents were often inadequately trained in sign language. The communication methods

used by the students ranged from sign language, oral to a combination of both. The participants

included “all deaf or hard-of-hearing students in the two programs at the two high school (n 1/4

48; 21 girls, 27 boys), (b) the staff of the deaf departments at these two schools, and (c) the

parents/guardians of the students. The students in this program ranged in age from 13 to 19

(Grades 9–12). Following a pre-use survey designed to glean thoughts on how students could use

32

the messagers before actually experiencing them, the students and their families were given two-

way text messagers. After 4 to 9 months of text-messager use, the users filled out a post-use

survey in order to compare predicted usage to actual usage. The satisfaction with the technology

was ‘overwhelmingly positive’, additionally, peripheral functionalities of the devices were used.

Students mentioned that they used their two-way text messagers not only to
communicate with their parents, school staff, and each other but also for other
things as well. For example, one student mentioned that the alarm function helped
him remember to take his medication. Many students reported that homework
assignments could be recorded. Others used their two-way text messagers to
remind them of significant dates (birthdays, appointments with doctor, dentist,
etc.) or to type out messages so that other hearing people could read them (e.g.,
restaurant orders, to call emergency services). This provided an incentive to
improve their English. (Akamatsu et al., 2006, p. 7)

This research from Akamatsu et al. (2005) is of interest, not only because increasing

accessibility is a priority in developing nations such as Canada, but also because of the simplicity

and affordability of the resources that were used to provide accessibility. Mobile phones are

familiar and available to youth the world over, and they are a resource that is ready to exploited

by schools that choose to embrace them. The low barrier of entry in terms of cost and learning

curve mean that schools in developing countries-often lacking in accessibility provisions-will

need to invest less in procurement and training, which can only encourage adoption.

Discussion.

The target populations for access oriented mobile learning vary in terms of backgrounds,

needs as well as physical and financial abilities, but share the need for educational access that

was not being served by traditional educational institutes or pedagogy. As previously stated, the

traditional educational institutions apply a strategy of knowledge dissemination that assumes a

level of homogeneity in terms of student body composition, while this strategy is often effective

in addressing large swathes of the overall student body, there are those that are inevitably left off

33

the conversation. These populations, as we have seen in the case studies, can be diverse, ranging

from migrant workers, students with physical disabilities, students who cannot commit pre-

determined hours for education, to students who are geographically remote. In the studies

reviewed the dissemination of education to these populations was done primarily through the

advent of mobile devices, especially mobile phones. The familiarity, ease of use and low-cost of

these devices means that these devices are readily available to these populations, and the

increasing need for constant communications in the modern world means that they are more

likely to own this technology than not. Of course, issues of pedagogy and technological

limitations exist with mobile devices, but they are outweighed by advantages such as low cost

and familiarity.

Chapter 5:
Analyses of Case Studies:
Enhancing Learning

The Mobile device is used in a manner that provides a meaningful
difference in learning achievement when compared to non-use
scenarios.

Any introduction in an educational setting of a technology that exceeds the complexity of

a writing instrument or surface has a very good reason for being there. Education in itself needs

very little in terms of physical tools in order to fulfill its primary function, the dissemination or

creation of knowledge. There is no fundamental difference in the quality of knowledge being

disseminated or created whether it is under a tree in an African village, or in a smart-room

outfitted class in Taiwan. There is no doubt however that the learning experience can be

enhanced through the intervention and introduction of learning aids that go beyond paper and

pencil. Complex concepts, such as the solar system, can be better understood through the use of

three-dimensional foam models, geography through maps, chemistry through chemicals, biology

through fetuses to operate on, medical science through cadavers, film class through projectors

and so on. Theory can only go so far.

Mobile Devices to Enhance Learning

The case studies presented in this category share the theme of mobile devices being used

to enhance the learning experience. Mobile devices place an immediate availability of

computational power at the fingertips of the users. This computational power can be used to

enhance the learning experience through the use of the aural, visual, or interactive nature of these

devices. There are also a number of increasingly complex functionalities provided by more

34

35

modern mobile devices. These enhanced functionalities include: location awareness through the

use of Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) chips, storage of media such as pod casts in memory

cards, picture taking through integrated mobile phone cameras, among others. Educators have

been able to use these functionalities in creative ways to both enhance comprehension of

complex topics, as well as accelerate mastery of simpler ones. The following case studies review

some of the more innovative uses of mobile devices to enhance learning.

Lessons Based on Geo-Referenced Information

The mobility provided by mobile devices such as cell phones allows for previously static

educational experiences to become dynamic in terms of location. If the necessary study materials

and resources are available on the mobile device then the learner is no longer restricted to a

classroom setting. This opens up opportunities for in-situ learning across a number of

disciplines, including, Biology, History, Geography and Art History among others. Even beyond

the basic mobile device there are a number of assistive technologies that can meaningfully

enhance these in situ learning experiences, ranging from digital cameras, audio note taking and

Global Positioning Systems (GPS). GPSs in particular, have come a long way towards making a

meaningful impact on education. GPS devices use an embedded chip that use satellite data to

determine the user’s location in terms of longitude and latitude, often overlaying this information

on meta-data such as maps or other useful information. Giroux, Moulin, Sanna, & Pintus (2002)

discusses the potential of one such case study where ‘geo-referenced’ data was used to

meaningfully enhance a field trip to Roman ruins in Italy.

In 2001, the teachers of a High School in Italy used the e-mate platform to develop a

mobile lesson for the archeological site called Nora for a group of 12-13 year old students. E-

36

mate is described as ‘…a framework for delivery of mobile personalized geo-referenced services

over many channels (PCs, personal digital assistants (PDAs), cellular phones…_ and using

multi-modality (text, image, sound…)’ (Giroux et al., 2002; p. 2). Using this Internet distributed

framework, the teachers identified Zones of Interest at the site, following which they created ‘hot

spots’, or precise locations that will correspond to relevant data on the students’ mobile devices.

It is the job of the students to physically locate these ‘hot spots’ at the actual sites, and then

determine why the teachers actually chose these spots. Students used laptop computers

connected to GPS devices to locate hot spots such ‘Roman Theatre’. The students had to locate

the hot spot based on the physical characteristics of the particular hot spot implied by the name,

i.e. looking for the characteristics of structure that resembles a theatre for the Roman Theatre hot

spot. The system provided hints and encouragement when students were having difficulty

locating particular spots. Once students were close enough to an identified hot spot, the devices

asked questions relating to that particular spot that were predetermined by the teachers. The data

gathered from the site was later collated in the classroom and used as springboards for class

discussion and reports.

The e-mate example is one of the earliest of using geo-referenced data in field lessons, it

is also one that demonstrates the power mobile devices and assistive technologies have to

enhance the learning experience. A traditional version of this lesson would most likely involve

the teacher guiding the students around the sites pointing out sites of interest and providing either

prepared notes or lectures or both, which, while effective, lacks the independent investigation

and analysis required by the GPS assisted lesson described above. The advantages provided by a

GPS assisted lesson needs to be balanced with the inevitable ‘technological burden’ that is

introduced by technology introduced to any environment for the first time. The equipment

37

described by the project state that students were required to carry both a laptop computer as well

as the GPS device. The question then arises as to how much the students were restricted by these

obviously cumbersome loads in a field setting. Additionally, this study took place in 2001, which

a very long time in terms of mobile device development. In the seven years since this study, the

functionalities of both laptops and GPS devices can now be found in mobile phones that are quite

small and portable. The use of these devices goes quite a long way towards lowering the

technology burden introduced by bulky electronic devices in field settings.

iTree

The iTree project represents a truly innovative use of mobile phones in education, in this

case, to encourage participation. The author’s motivation for this project lay in the growth of

Bulletin Boards Systems (BBSs) in class discussions online. Bulletin Board Systems are online

discussion boards where users can post thoughts, start discussions and analyze course contents

and other materials. However, a BBS is highly dependent on a number of factors, such as student

participation, in order to be an effective discussion tool. Nakahara, Hisamatsu, Yaegashi, &

Yamauchi (2005) discuss the shortcomings of the BBS:

One pressing concern the medium faces is learners need encouragement to browse
and respond to BBS postings. Effective collaborative learning will not occur
unless learners make an effort to read posts and respond to them. The situation is
exacerbated when a learner does not keep up with the forum, when it becomes
extremely difficult to catch up with the backlog of information and volumes of
new posts .In order to address this issue, learners would benefit from a convenient
system to inform them of BBS postings in a timely manner. (p. 2)

To encourage participation in these BBS forums, the researchers tested a unique solution

that is well suited for the technology-centric culture in Japan: a visual rewards system that is

reminiscent of Japanese gaming phenomena such as Tamagotchi, where players raised an

38

electronic ‘pet’ that needed to be fed and walked just like its real-life counterparts. The iTree

program needs to be installed in the mobile phones of the users, following which the program

communicates with web servers that track the users’ rate of participation in relevant BBS

forums. Upon opening (flip phones) or unlocking the mobile phone, the user is immediately

greeted with the image of a fruit-bearing tree as the background wallpaper. The health of this tree

directly corresponds to the rate of participation by the user in the BBS forums, thus, the greater

the rate of participation, the healthier the tree. Nakahara et al. explain that the image of a tree

was selected because it was ideal:

The choice of image needed to meet two requirements: (1) BBS forum
information had to be available at a glance, and (2) the image itself had to be
appealing. A tree which grows and changes was chosen to fulfill these
requirements. The metaphor of a growing tree was chosen as (1) the tree itself
comes to symbolize the learner and (2) the growth of the tree expresses growth in
forum participation. The image of the tree is fixed in the middle of the mobile
phone screen. The growth of the tree is affected by four variables: (1) your
number of posts, (2) the number of times your posts are read, (3) the number of
replies to your posts, and (4) your ratio of total forum posts to replies. These
variable factors make up an individual user's BBS participation profile. (2005,
p. 4)

A study was conducted on the effect of iTree on BBS postings with 9 students from a

course on Information Policy at the University of Tokyo. Despite the intriguing approach, the

results from the study indicated that iTree did not encourage readers to post more. However, the

results did indicate that iTree encouraged users to read more postings online. This result is a

puzzling one, why would iTree encourage posters to read online posting but not to participate?

Especially since the participants themselves later revealed in a subjective evaluation that they

were ‘worried about growth of tree’? The problem may lie in the low number of participants for

the iTree group, at 9. Such a number is not sufficient to derive meaningful conclusions,

especially when compared to the large number subjects in the control group, which stood at 53.

39

In the author’s opinion, this number, although included in the paper, should have been identified

as a limitation.

This study is an example of a creative use of mobile phones in education, one that

demonstrates the uniqueness of the medium. The iTree as described by the study is not a

program that is resource intensive in terms of either hardware or software. Although a basic

data/internet connection is needed on the mobile phone, the representation of the tree requires

only a color screen on the mobile device itself. The question remains as to the value added to

education, since participation was not significantly increased and although the researchers

demonstrate an intriguing approach, they were unable to utilize it an effective way. The next

study, although not as visual an implementation, is nonetheless more effective in making actual

use of some mobile phones to enhance education.

Mobile Computer Supported Collaborative Learning

Zurita and Nussbaum (2004) looked to mobile phones as a potential solution for

incorporating constructive environments in the pedagogical practice (p. 1). The first

implementation introduced the concept of constructive environments for children 6-7 year olds in

an elementary school in Chile. Focusing on Social Constructivism-where new knowledge is

created from contributions from all members of a learning group (Vygotsky, 1964)-the project

aimed to develop communication and social skills that encouraged cooperation and dialogue

between members of a learning group. The researchers explain their aims with the project using

Roschelle and Teasley’s (1995) principles of Social Constructivism:

Constructive means that the students have to modify their current knowledge
schemes to integrate new information and acquire new knowledge. Active
indicates that total student participation is expected. Significant refers that
learning has to be with a meaning, built from the conceptual structure the student

40

already has. Based on consultation points out that the child has to formulate
his/her own questions, from multiple interpretations and learning expressions.
Reflexive shows that the student has to mirror his/her own experience on other
students, making them experts in their own learning. Finally, to be Collaborative
indicates that the child learns from others by working together on the same
objective, where each group member is a potential source of information.
(pp. 1-2)

Given that the target group were mostly first grade students, Zurita & Nussbaum focused

on a common skill expected of that age group, comprehensive reading of brief texts, usually

containing all the alphabets and different types of syllables. Spanish is a language that lends

itself well to multiple word formation from a single group of syllables, so the researchers setup

both a traditional as well as a mobile phone version of this syllabic method of reading

comprehension for the students. The children participating were all from a public school in

Santiago, Chile whose student body was from families of primarily low Socio-Economic Status

(SES). All had basic knowledge of syllables and words and had been in school for eight and a

half months at the time of the experiment. Each group consisted of 12 seven-year-old children

each. The gender split was 7:5 boys to girls in the experimental group, and 1:1 in the control

group. Children were randomly placed in groups of 3 in both groups, and the group’s

composition was maintained. In the control group, each child received a syllable in an envelope

which when combined with the syllables received by the other students could form words. Once

the children have agreed on a word to spell, the child with the first token will place it on a board,

followed by the correct placement of the other syllables required. Upon exhaustion of the

possible pool of words they were handed a new set of syllables to repeat the exercise.

The experimental group was equipped with mobile phones that were loaded with a

software version of the syllabic word formation game. On the screen of each mobile was one of

the syllables, the children had to use the same negotiating and cooperative techniques as the

41

control group in order to agree on the word, however, once agreed, each child had to push the

button in the mobile in the correct order in to spell the word, with each mobile sharing a common

view of the word about to be formed. Once the word was constructed, the mobiles requested

confirmation of each user about their agreement on the final word, if all users confirmed ‘yes’,

then the final word was displayed, and the process was repeated with more words. Following the

experiment, the authors noticed some intriguing results:

The experiment lasted for 4 weeks with daily activities, totaling 20 sessions. Both
experimental and control groups were given the same set of activities. Since it
was experimentally discovered that the Syllable-MCSCL(experimental) group
required 40% less time (on average) to complete the given assignment their
sessions were shorter, i.e. 25-min sessions in the Syllable-CL(control) group and
15-min sessions in the Syllable-MCSCL group. The first two sessions were
slightly longer (30 min for Syllable-CL and 20 min for Syllable- MCSCL) to
allow the children to get used to the activity and technology. By the 12th session,
some Syllable-CL groups were achieving their goal in 20 min, and some Syllable-
MCSCL groups were achieving their goal in 10 min. In both groups, the children
occasionally required teacher assistance, primarily with word-understanding
problems. (Zurita & Nussbaum, 2004 p. 6)

Clearly, the mobile mediated version of the syllable activity had a more positive impact on word

construction skills than its traditional counterpart. To investigate whether this phenomenon is

transferable across disciplines, the researchers created a mathematics version of the same

activity.

ORD-CL.

The MCSCL approach was also applied to mathematics (Zurita, Nussbaum, & Shaples,

2003). A simple, Collaborative Learning (CL) activity called ORD-CL was chosen as the activity

to be repeated across both a non-technological as well as technological space. The main

objective of the activity is to practice number ordering skills, where ‘groups of three to five

participants of both genders order seven series of three to five numbers (from 1 to 100) in either

42

an ascendant or descendent way.’ A control (traditional) and an experimental (mobile) group

included 24 children, each 7 years old, with a 1:1 gender ratio in the experimental group and 13

boys and 11 girls in the control group. Similarly to the word activity described above, each group

was given a set of envelopes containing, in this case, numbers which the group had to collaborate

to arrange in the correct ascending or descending order on a board. A technological counterpart

to this collaborative activity was setup, similar to the word activity described previously.

Handheld Compaq PocketPC devices with wireless Internet connectivity were used to host an

electronic version of the ORD-CL activity. In each participant’s handheld screen the number

assigned to them would appear, with an up-arrow signifying ascending order while a down arrow

signified descending order. Upon discussion and agreement, the group would have to press the

appropriate button on their handheld in order, when the entire sequence was ordered it appeared

on the screens of each participant, following unanimous confirmation by the group that the order

was correct, the sequence would be completed and group would move on to the next series of

numbers. When a controlled experiment to test the effectiveness of the ORD-CL activity versus

the traditional versions was performed, clear differences between the groups began emerging:

The four week duration of the experiment consisted of 20 daily session of 25 minutes each for

the control groups and the 15 minutes in the experimental groups. Although both groups were

given the same set of activities and daily goal, the experimental group required 40% less time to

complete the goal. By the 12th session, this number had improved to 100% for some

experimental groups.

High schools.

The researchers then extended the MCSCL concept further, to focus on science lessons.

Cortez, Nussbaum, Santelices, Rodriguez, Zurita, Correa, & Cautivo (2004) arranged public high

43

school science students in groups of three equipped with PocketPC handheld devices. These

students then had to answer multiple choice questions related to physics in a collaborative

manner similar to the syllabic experiment, meaning they had to collaborate, discuss, and agree

upon an answer until they could move to the next one. In this case, both the control as well as the

experimental groups worked with mobile devices to answer the questions, the difference between

the groups being that the experimental had the material related to the questions explained to them

beforehand by the teacher, while the control group received no such explanation. This was

because on this occasion, the goals of the researchers were slightly more complex, as they

explain by the way of question selection.

The selected questions were classified in the following manner:

Type 1 Questions:

Questions whose answers were explained to the experimental group by the teacher during

the classes.

Type 2 Questions:

Questions whose answers were not directly explained to the experimental group by the

teacher during the classes.

Cortez et al. (2004) justify this classification as one necessary to compare the number of

attempts for each type of question and to observe what effect the classroom environment created

by the activity had on the students to answer Type 2 questions with success a rate comparable to

that of Type 1 questions. Basically, were the students able to independently construct and acquire

new knowledge that allowed them to correctly answer questions to which they were not taught

44

the answers? And were these questions answered in a similar number of attempts as to the

questions to which they were taught answers?

Results.

For the syllabic experiment, an analysis of covariance was run both pre-test and post-test

in order to assess initial levels of ability. In both cases, the intervention showed a strong effect on

the post-test ability to construct words. While inter-group comparison showed ‘a significant

difference’ between the two groups, with the control group performing worse than the

experimental group. For the mathematics version of MCSCL an analysis of co-variance was

performed in the post-test score with the pre-test score held as a co-variate between the

experimental and control groups. It showed ‘significant difference in means between participants

in the experimental versus control groups’ in favor of the experimental group (Zurita et al., 2003,

p. 14). In the physics example, a Univariate Analysis of Variance showed that a statistically

significant difference existed for the number of attempts required to answer questions between

the groups, ‘That is to say, the students in the control group needed, on average, more attempts to

correctly answer the questions on the test’ (Zurita et al., 2003, p. 5). The experimental group also

had no statistically significant differences in terms of number of attempts to answer questions of

Type 1 versus Type 2, while the control group did have differences, leading the researchers to

conclude that a collaborative environment was successfully created in the experimental group.

This MCSCL project is an important one in many ways, in both the syllabic and number

ordering games, a traditional process was made more intuitive and accessible for the users,

easing along the way social interactions that are essential in collaborative learning. The result

was that beyond the simple novelty of performing a familiar task on a new technological

medium, the learning process was actually enhanced in terms of a student performance due to the

45

new medium, in this case a mobile phone. Equally important was that the syllabic and

mathematics versions of MCSCL involved children from low SES backgrounds, implying that

these groups have a familiarity with the technology present in a mobile phone. In the high school

implementation the MCSCL concept was successfully transplanted into more sophisticated

subjects with a more sophisticated student body, but the basic objective of creating a

collaborative learning environment was preserved. While one always has to be wary of the

‘Novelty Effect’ of using a new tool on the results of experiments, the repeated success of the

mobile collaborative model across grade and subject levels speaks positively for the flexibility of

this nearly universal technology.

Participatory Simulations

What if mobile devices were used to not simply analyze scientific processes or as a tool

to coordinate answers but to simulate the processes themselves? Wilensky and Stroup (2000)

describe Participatory Simulations as simulations that allow learners to participate in scientific

and mathematical role-playing activities in order to explore the evolution of complex and

dynamic systems. They give examples such as the exploration of the predator-prey relationship

in an eco-system, or the role of individual cars in creating gridlock, among others . The

expectation being that the participants, by personally reenacting the system’s dynamics, will

develop a deeper understanding of it.

Klopfer, Yoon, & Perry (2005) sought to understand the value of participatory

simulations as perceived by teachers. The goal was to “identify issues, advantages and

challenges in implementing Participatory Simulations from the educator’s perspective and

present evidence to suggest an alternative interpretation of the ubiquity and accessibility them”

Arif thesis-dec15'08(final version)

Arif thesis-dec15'08(final version)

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Arif thesis-dec15'08(final version)

Similar to Arif thesis-dec15'08(final version) (20)

More from Arif Anwar

More from Arif Anwar (16)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Arif thesis-dec15'08(final version)