An Evolution of Mobile Learning

A few months ago, I had an immature view of what mobile learning was. My view was that mobile learning was dependent on mobile technologies: “mobile learning is utilizing the affordances of portable technology (e.g. smartphone, health & fitness tracking devices, tablets) to support any type of learning, informal or formal, when on the go.” Over the course of a semester, I developed a more mature view of what I consider mobile learning. mobile-learningMy definition mirrors what Sharples et al. (2009) describe—”mobile learning is the study of how the mobility of learners augmented by personal and public technology can contribute to the process of gaining new knowledge, skills and experience” (p. 235). In this new definition, I conclude that mobile learning is learning anywhere and anytime the learner becomes curious. It can be augmented by persona and public technologies, but it does not solely rely on “utilizing the affordances of mobile technology” as aforementioned.

Moving forward with mobile learning, we must be intentional of how and what we design. Mobile learning is not simply providing recorded instructor lectures to learners via a mobile device. As educators and instructional designers, we need to be careful that we are not “reinforc[ing] the negative effects of passive nonparticipatory learning” (Wang, 2009, p. 673). One takeaway from Wang et al. (2009) is to design interactive and engaging content that allows learners to be participants in their learning, and not passive consumers. Wang et al. reference studies from Wang & Kang that show “having an emotional connection is the first step in building a learning community” (p. 685). Designing to elicit that emotional connection in our learners is vital to building an engaging learning community.

Another intriguing concept is from the Brown, Heggs, and Millican (2013) technology article on using iPads for clinical supervision. Although iPad research is limited, I expect it to grow as iPads are quickly becoming an educational supertool. Brown et al. (2013) references McCready in talking about the Millennial generation. “Millennials developed a “sixth sense” for technology; so, utilizing the new generations’ prowess for technology seems like the next step in clinical instruction” (p. 10). Although this is in the context of clinical instruction, I believe this is seamlessly applied to other learning contexts. Through the clinical supervision iPad integration article, Brown et al. discovered that “by using the iPad as part of the curriculum, the program encourages students to learn in multiple modes and to incorporate technology into their own practice as clinicians-in-training” (p. 5). By introducing and supplying iPads to the students as freshmen, they had access to them throughout their entire graduate education. In doing so, these students have learned how to learn with technology and have even gained negotiating and analytical skills as well. If the students found an app that they thought would benefit their patients, they had to fill out and submit an “iPad App Request Form” justifying how it would benefit their patient and include “evidence-based rationale” (p. 6).

With mobile learning and technology infused so deeply in today’s society, we must keep in mind the pitfalls. Pierce (2009) looks at the relationship between social anxiety and technology and suggests that “teens are using socially interactive technology (SIT) to communicate with others and it appears that social anxiety is influencing this use or at least may be serving as a substitute for face-to-face communication” (p. 1369). Similar to Wang et al. (2009) design intention above, I want to reinforce the decision to create more interactive learning opportunities and less non-interactive ones. “Those who use the Internet primarily for non-interactive purposes also tend to have fewer in-person social ties (Zhao, 2006). In contrast, those who frequent interactive sites tend to maintain strong interpersonal (in-person) connections (Zhao, 2006)” (Pierce, 2009, p. 1368). Through engaging learning and interactions, learners develop 21st century skills in relation to networking and building connections.

 

References

Brown, K., Heggs, A., & Millican, K. (2013). Technology: Project Using iPads for Clinical Supervision. Perspectives on Administration and Supervisions, 23(1), 4-11.

Pierce, T. (2009). Social anxiety and technology: Face-to-face communication versus technological communication among teens. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(6), 1367-1372.

Sharples, M., Arnedillo-Sánchez, I., Milrad, M., Vavoula, G., Balacheff, N., Ludvigsen, S.,…Barnes, S. (2009). Mobile Learning: Small Devices, Big Issues. In Technology-Enhanced Learning: Principles and Products (pp. 233-249). Springer.

Wang, M., Shen, R., Novak, D., & Pan, X. (2009). The impact of mobile learning on students’ learning behaviours and performance: Report from a large blended classroom. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(4), 673-695.

Mobile Learning Fun: Seamless Learning, PAC Framework, Temporal Effects, and Multitasking

I’m really glad that we are visiting seamless learning again. This was an idea that I was really drawn to when it was mentioned in Week 4, Lesson 3 by Sharples (2013). I mentioned in a previous blog post that I could “pick [seamless learning] apart for hours” but I didn’t. I focused on a piece of the definition provided by Sharples that I related to multitasking, which we will also visit briefly later in this post with Bowman et al. (2010). Looi et al. (2010) builds on Sharples’ definition of seamless learning by saying that “seamless learning environment bridges private and public learning spaces where learning happens as both individual and collective efforts and across different contexts (such as in-school versus after-school, formal versus informal)” (p. 156). This is definitely a strong attribute related to mobile learning via mobile technologies, or as Wong (2012) describes/extends it as “mobile seamless learning” (p. E19). Another great point that Looi et al. makes is by quoting Watson: “‘We spend a lot of time trying to change people. The thing to do is to change the environment and people will change themselves’ (Watson, 2006, p. 24)” (p. 156). This could be a great intended design decision when creating mobile learning; focus on changing the environment and the learners’ will naturally adapt.

I really like the concept of seamless learning, but when I got really interested was when Wong (2012) extended Looi et al. seamless learning with the “10 Dimensions”. The three that really stuck out were “MSL 3, 4, and 8; learning across time, learning across locations, and seamless and rapid switching between multiple learning tasks,” (p. E19) respectively. All dimensions are great and should be considered for integration, but these three popped out to me, especially the learning across time. Looi et al. touched on the temporal configuration of seamless learning, but Wong extends this even further and then Kearney et al. really dives into how time affects and is affected by mobile learning. Kearney et al. (2012)  discusses the idea of “malleable spatial-temporal contexts for learning” (p. 4), which takes into account that mobile learning has the power to “blur” popular beliefs that learning only happens in a designated space at designed times. With this idea, the learner has more agency and is enabled to learn wherever and whenever they feel are curious.

kearney-PAC-mobile-circle

Figure 1: PAC mLearning Framework

On that note, Kearney et al. also present a framework for mobile learning (see Figure 1). The framework is built on three constructs, each with two sub-scales, which has a “symbiotic relationship” (p. 8) with time and space in relation to mobile learning. They applied the framework to 30 scenarios of mobile learning, of which they discussed six specific cases. What I find interesting is that the scenarios that were primarily “school-based tasks restrained by curriculum and learning space constraints, the podcast and Maths examples lacked agency and customisation” (p. 13). These scenarios, if you look again, did not rate high in any of these constructs. Maybe we need to consider changing the environment in order for our learners to adapt and change?

To conclude, I read Bowman et al. case study on how college students multitask. Their conclusion is that students actually require more time when performing an academic function if they multitask (e.g., respond to IMs). However, I feel that this study was a bit biased. “Students were told if they did receive IMs, to respond with complete sentences or phrases to equalize response styles across individuals and conditions” (p. 929). This is not realistic at all. Of course the results would favor requiring more time. When students multitask, or any time they IM, I highly doubt students always respond in complete sentences or phrases. That’s just not how texting works in today’s culture and I feel that this study could produce different results if it was more realistic. On another note, multitasking is a concern to acknowledge when designing for mobile learning. Can we keep mobile learning short enough, possibly in bite size chunks, to combat multitasking problems?

References

Bowman, L. L., Levine, L. E., Waite, B. M., & Gendron, M. (2010). Can students really multitask? An experimental study of instant messaging while reading. Computers & Education, 54(4), 927-931. Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.024

Looi, C.-K., Seow, P., Zhang, B., So, H.-J., Chen, W., & Wong, L.-H. (2010). Leveraging mobile technology for sustainable seamless learning: A research agenda. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(2), 154-169. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00912.x

Kearney, M., Schuck, S., Burden, K., & Aubusson, P. (2012). Viewing mobile learning from a pedagogical perspective.Research In Learning Technology, 20:1, 1-17. doi:10.3402/rlt.v20i0/14406. Note: open access journal, click the link to access article. This article is not in the course reserves.

Sharples, M. (2013). Mobile learning: research, practice and challenges. Distance Education in China, 3(5), 5-11.

Wong, L.-H. (2012). A learner-centric view of mobile seamless learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(1), E19-E23. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01245.x

Exploring Mobile Devices in Designed Learning Environments

Two quotes came to me this week as I was traversing through the readings. The first from John Dewey, “If we teach today’s students as we taught yesterday’s, we rob them of tomorrow.” And the second from a book I mentioned earlier in the semester, The Medium is the Massage. It’s a fascinating read that was published in 1967 and everything inside the book still holds true today; I highly recommend checking it out if you get a chance, it’s a short read. Anyways, the author, Fiore, comment on the state of the family:

The family circle has widened. The worldpool of information fathered by electric media—movies, Telstar, flight—far surpasses any possible influence mom and dad can now bring to bear. Character no longer is shaped by only two earnest, fumbling experts. Now all the world’s a sage” (p. 14)

I bring these two quotes up because they both describe my current thoughts on mobile technologies and mobile learning. Dewey is arguing that educators are holding out on students today by teaching them as they have been taught. Mobile technology cannot simply be used to replicate old and current teaching styles. If that’s the case, we are missing the point. Mobile technology should be revolutionizing learning. As for Fiore’s idea, I interpret this as kids and students and learners in general are now being influenced by the world. Mobile technologies has made the world much smaller. This is changing everything, especially how our identity is shaped and how we come to view ourselves, our neighbors, our local surroundings, and the world.

Martin’s “Designing Mobile Based Instruction” (2012) discusses a computer science based instruction course that taught students, with “no prior programming experience” (p. 48) how to develop mobile instruction for the web. They designed their instruction in Adobe Dreamweaver intended for use on Apple iPods. I was fascinated by the no prior programming experience part, and how successful they were. The students focused on size, usability, and content design; three design recommendations that they discuss after their projects. They note how the small screen size dictates the amount of content allowed and how succinct sentences have to become. Every sentence and word has to be intentional. For usability, one student notes how “you have to take out all the fluff” (p. 49) and as for the content design, the students focused on a “very simple design so that content can take center stage” (p. 49). Two majors challenges that came out of this study was “mobile development and delivery methods” and “product testing” (p. 50). Accessibility was a concern for mobile development and the decision was made to go with a mobile website over an app due to apps being dependent on a certain device, while mobile websites can be accessed more widely.

Next, I dove into Kukulska-Hulme et. al.’s “Mature Students Using Mobile Devices in Life and Learning,” (2011) which turned out to be a fascinating read. The article opened up with a statement from the JISC that “learners can be active makers and shapers of their own learning. They should in using technologies of their own choice where appropriate” (p. 18). The article was largely based on an extensive survey of “mature students”, of which the authors defined as “those who are at the point of completing their Higher Education, in particular those studying at master’s or doctoral level in the fields of education, educational technology, engineering and information technology” (p. 20). The report examined mobile use in everyday life and learning from students in Australia, Portugal, Sweden, Hong Kong, and the United Kingdom. The survey included five sections (p. 23):

  1. About yourself
  2. The use of mobile devices—now or in the past
  3. Being part of groups and communities
  4. Specific uses for mobile devices
  5. Mobile devices for learning: what’s special, what’s a problem?

The findings were both interesting, yet not surprising. As someone who has grown up with a mobile device, I found that I connected with almost every finding that the survey found. Kukulska-Hulme et. al. noted that “reported benefits of using mobile devices to be part of groups or communities include spontaneous communication, flexibility, speed, fun, support, experience sharing, intellectual stimulation and use of technology to cope with changing arrangements” (p. 27). They also listed several issues that the students pointed out in using mobile devices with learning and everyday life (p. 30):

  • Slow writing, difficulty scanning when reading
  • Noisy environments, e.g. on public transport
  • Restrictive environments, e.g. hospitals
  • Can’t connect mobile to projector
  • Difficulty synchronizing several devices
  • Poor sound quality
  • Inequality of access
  • Distracting, intrusive
  • Feeling of ‘physical togetherness’ is missing
  • Becoming dependent on the mobile

These are all important factors to consider when designing for mobile learning; however, there is one that I would like to call attention to: “feeling of ‘physical togetherness’ is missing”. This is a problem that seems to crop up every time technology is a discussion around education, especially distance education. I don’t have an answer for this, but it should not be forgotten. We must keep this in mind when we design mobile learning.

To conclude, I explored two journal articles relating to nursing and healthcare. The first article explored the use of mobile technologies in the acquisition of clinical skills, and followed eight nurses who were taking the Routine Infant Physical Examinations (NIPE). They were given iPods loaded with RLOs, reusable learning objects, and were encouraged to reference these RLOs during their clinical experience. Although there were only eight participants, all eight of them had positive experiences and were satisfied or very satisfied with the RLOs on the iPods. I would like to see this study done again on a larger scale; I’m not sure eight participants is enough to provide valid research. It also seems as if cost is an issue on just about every mobile learning initiative, but when isn’t cost an issue? I also thought it was neat that all the participants “reported that they felt empowered to learn and that the flexibility of where the learning could take place enhanced their acquisition of the performance skills required for NIPE” (Clay, 2011, p. 585).

The last article was an extremely short (2.5 page) article about the mobile chain of survival, or CPR and AED. The authors talked about how mobile technologies has benefitedScreen Shot 2015-10-24 at 4.26.42 PM people and the amount of time needed to call 911 and perform CPR. What drew my attention to this article; however, was Fig. 2. “There are also accessories being developed, to facilitate their use, in the shape of a case and a cradle, which offers additional benefits in terms of reducing CPR fatigue” (Kovic, 2011, p. 777). Not only are mobile technologies aiding in the digital and technological realm, but they are also being used in non-conventional ways to save lives. I find this very fascinating and is a reminder to think outside the box when designing for mobile learning!

References

Clay, C. (2011). Exploring the use of mobile technologies for the acquisition of clinical skills. Nurse education today, 31(6), 582-6. Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2010.10.011

Fiore, Q. (1967). The medium is the massage. New York: Random House.

Kovic, I., & Lulic, I. (2011). Mobile phone in the chain of survivalResuscitation,82(6), 776-779.

Kukulska-Hulme, A., Pettit, J., Bradley, L., Carvalho, A. a., Herrington, A., Kennedy, D. M., & Walker, A. (2011). Mature students using mobile devices in life and learning. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 3(1), 18-52. doi:10.4018/jmbl.2011010102

Martin, F., Pastore, R., & Snider, J. (2012). Developing mobile based instruction. TechTrends, 56 (5), 46-51.

How a University in Texas is Leading the Charge for Mobile Learning

“The increasing use, availability, and low cost of equipment invites educators to begin finding ways to successfully use these devices in their classrooms” (Martin, 2012, p. 51). Here is how an entire university has been doing what Martin described for several years already.

In my quest for an example of mobile technology integration, I stumbled upon Abilene Christian University in Texas. “Since 2008, ACU has been recognized nationally as a visionary leader in campus-wide exploration and 1-to-1 deployment of iPhones, iPod touches and iPads.DA82069LOGOIt’s been fascinating exploring how ACU has been utilizing mobile technologies to capitalize on mobile learning. I want to focu on “Revolutionizing the Classroom” YouTube video, the first video posted below. The other two videos I pulled out small excerpts to focus on. Do not feel like you have to watch the entire 30-minute video at the bottom, unless you feel compelled to keep exploring. I know I did! It provides a fascinating background on mobile learning, technology, and history and leads up to what ACU is doing—really good stuff!

In this example, ACU gave iPads to two different groups of students. One group was using the iPads to experience a completely digital classroom: no paper, no books—everything was on the iPad. The second group of students, a senior-level marketing strategy class, was charged with studying the first. Talk about ethnographic, hands-on research. There was most likely an additional layer of research happening in the background, with faculty researching how the second group of students were researching the first group of students. Here is a quote from a student in the first group, the completely digital classroom:

“With a digital textbook, you can also incorporate media; you can incorporate audio. Not only can you do all that, but then you can maybe blog about it. You can copy and paste it to an email. You can be in a class; you can research something.” —Jonathan Murata, student

Another quick example at ACU is from Adam Hester, Chair of ACU Theatre Department:

“Mobile learning has allowed me a kind of versatility and an immediacy that I didn’t have before…it allowed me to hack in a little bit more into my class than I normally would have.”

The “ACU Mobile Learning” video (above, second video in this post) starts at 3:20 to highlight Hester’s comment. Although there is another fascinating example from a freshman student earlier on in that video. He used the myACU app to find building locations of his classes and to map out walking routes. The myACU app appears to be a native application designed by ACU. It makes me wonder why a large University like Penn State doesn’t have an app like this.

This last idea comes from Dr. William Rankin, Director of Educational Innovation at ACU. The video begins at 24:23 with this quote, “We need to create is not the factory; we need to blow that up. We need to create the laboratory.” He then describes Thomas Edison’s laboratory and how he needed access to everything because he “didn’t know what he needed until he needed it.” He parallels this to a “mobile-y equipped generation” where they carry “a thousand libraries in their pocket”. He mentions how flexible books are becoming and we need flexible teaching that not only allows people to consume but also to create. He ends with an example of climate change and hints at Peppler’s (2013) framework for interest-driven arts learning, one that is “cross-disciplinary—and perhaps anti-disciplinary” (p. 19).

References

Abilene Christian University. (2012, August 23). Mobile Learning [YouTube Playlist]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLD29F1464C77E45FD

Martin, F., Pastore, R., & Snider, J. (2012). Developing mobile based instruction. TechTrends, 56 (5), 46-51.

Mobile Learning Research. (n.d.). Retrieved October 22, 2015, from http://www.acu.edu/technology/mobilelearning/research/

Peppler, K. (2013). New opportunities for interest-driven arts. Report commissioned by The Wallace Foundation.

Mobile Learning: Augmented Reality and Quantified Self

MIT’s Dr. Eric Klopfer’s YouTube video on mobile AR games was an interesting watch, and directly related to two of the three articles I chose to read this week. I looked at Dunleavy and Dede’s Augmented reality teaching and learning and Martin et. al.’s Participatory scaling through augmented reality learning through local games. Both were fascinating reads about AR. Dunleavy and Dede (2014) introduced what augmented reality is and described two forms of AR for educator:

“(1) location-aware and (2) vision-based. Location-aware AR presents digital media to learners as they move through a physical area with a GPS-enabled smartphone or similar mobile device. The media (i.e., text, graphics, audio, video, 3D models) augment the physical environment with narrative, navigation, and/or academic information relevant to the location. In contrast, vision-based AR presents digital media to learners after they point the camera in their mobile device at an object (e.g., QR code, 2D target)” (p. 735).

They ground their AR research and findings in two learning theories: situated learning theory and constructivist learning theory. Martin et. al. also discuss their AR findings around situated learning theory as well. iphone-ARMartin et. al.’s (2014) piece focuses on ARIS, “an open-source tool for creating and disseminating mobile AR learning experiences and a socio-technical network of educators who develop and exchange resources and best practices” (p. 35) which “began as a class project” (p. 37). Martin et. el. discussed three projects that utilized ARIS, or augmented reality and interactive storytelling, mobile games. One specifically that caught my attention was Folklore, where a class of 80 college students were given iPads with an unlimited data plan and were tasked with “map[ping] and document[ing] (with photographs, video, and text notes) places on campus that they felt embodied their own university experience, share with the class, then visit their peers’ notes in the context of their significant places” (2014, p. 38). Through this assignment, both the instructor and students noted increased engagement and collaboration and community.

Dunleavy and Dede (2014) did comment on a limitation of AR; “students are often overwhelmed with the complexity of the activities” (p. 739). In contrast, this was a strength of the Fitbit article from Lee et. al. (2015);fitibit “a wearable activity tracker will passively gather information about the wearer’s movement…without requiring that individual’s attention. This means a child can gather activity data without disrupting their regular routine, and then subsequently examine and reflect upon these data” (Lee, 2015, p. 210). I was drawn to the Fitbit article because I myself wear a Fitbit daily and have now for quite a while. Also, I think there is a ton of potential for me to incorporate some sort of instructional activity within the College of Nursing, for student and/or faculty and staff. Lee et. al.’s (2015) Fitbit article used Fitbits in opportunistic ways in an elementary school setting. In other words, they utilized aspects of the day that were already being used for another activity.

For example, the school was already implementing what they calling “Morning Meetings”. The researches and teachers were able to incorporate “Fitbit starters” or “short data exploration episodes” (2015, p. 211) into these already existing Morning Meetings. What I found fascinating about this article was how 5th graders were using Fitbits to argue and prove how football wasn’t a more strenuous (more steps) activity than soccer. They used data from their trackers to prove that the sports actually required about the same exact steps.

I find these two areas fascinating: AR and the quantified self movement. After reading these three articles, I began wondering what an activity or game would look like that incorporated both? A Fitbit could be used or really any self-tracking device, and build that data into a mobile-AR game—it could make for some super engaging learning. The AR piece could be triggered by anyone wearing a Fitbit, and the Fitbit would send a bluetooth notification to the user’s smartphone, activating a web-based AR game or scavenger hunt, or a to-do list for the Fitbit (e.g. This area’s specific high step score is “xxx”. Would you like to try to beat this step score?). This, of course, is all a thought that was triggered from reading this week. Is it possible? Most likely. Would there be any educational benefits? Not sure. Further research is definitely required.

References

Dunleavy, M., & Dede, C. (2014). Augmented reality teaching and learning. In Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 735-745). Springer New York.

Lee, V. R., Drake, J., & Cain, R. (2015). Opportunistic uses of the traditional school day through student examination of Fitbit activity tracker data. Proceedings of IDC 2015.

Martin, J., Dikkers, S., Squire, K., & Gagnon, D. (2014). Participatory scaling through augmented reality learning through local games. TechTrends, 58(1), 35-41.

Zoom – Mobile App Review (5 of 5)

Reviewed by: Zach Lonsinger

Details

  • Seller: Zoom Video Communication, Inc.
  • Category: Business
  • Current Version: 3.5.5
  • Current Version Updated: Oct. 1, 2015
  • Release Date: June 19, 2013 (2.0.2)
  • iOS, Android
  • Cost: FREE

Review

HiAppHere_com_us.zoom.videomeetings

Zoom Cloud Meetings is a video conferencing and web conferencing service. It allows for virtual meetings via video, as well as instant messaging.

So why another video app, isn’t this just like Hangouts? Great question, I’m glad you asked. No—it’s completely different. We use Zoom in the College of Nursing quite a lot. Most of our graduate-level nursing classes are at multiple campuses, with some students at home, across the country, etc. To accommodate this, we connect our classes via Zoom meetings. This allows for students who cannot make it to class to connect to class virtually using the Zoom app on their mobile device or computer. Zoom also allows for room polycom systems to connect, making it simple for different campus locations to connect as well. Zoom also offers recording options, which either record to the local machine or the cloud—so classes can be recorded and archived as well. Many uses here, and this review barely scratched the surface of them!

This is another one of those apps that blurs the line between informal and formal. Using Zoom, this opens up the possibility of a student attending class from a coffee shop three time zones away, or on the train commuting home from work.

Specific 21st Century Skills Utilized (p. 25-28)

  • Learning and Innovation Skills
    • Critical Thinking and Problem Solving
    • Creativity and Innovation
    • Communication and Collaboration
    • Visual Literacy
    • Basic Literacy
  • Information, Media and Technology Skills
    • Information Literacy
    • Media Literacy
    • ICT Literacy
  • 21st Century Themes
    • Financial, Economic, Business, and Entrepreneurial Literacy
  • Life and Career Skills
    • Flexibility and Adaptability
    • Initiative and Self-Direction
    • Social and Cross-Cultural Skills
    • Productivity and Accountability
    • Leadership and Responsibility

Slack – Mobile App Review (4 of 5)

Reviewed by: Zach Lonsinger

Details

  • Seller: Slack Technologies, Inc.
  • Category: Business
  • Current Version: 2.35
  • Current Version Updated: Oct. 1, 2015
  • Release Date: June 13, 2014 (1.42)
  • iOS, Android
  • Cost: FREE

Review

mzl.pvjhbqpp

Slack is awesome. I may be biassed, but out of all of the group messaging services I have used, nothing else compares. At its very core, Slack is “team communication for the 21st century“.slac-mm

I have never used this for education purposes, but I have many great ideas! As you can see in the image to the right, I am a part of four teams. The one highlighted is the PSU Multimedia Specialists team. Each hashtag represents a different conversation. An education use would be for the teacher to use this for a specific course, and create group chat channels for small group projects or work. This would allow every student to access each other group’s chat channel, if the instructor set it up like that, or each chat channel can be kept private. The add-ons and functionality of Slack is simply amazing. It’s intuitive and growing every day. One of my favorite function is the integration of certain 3rd party apps, for example, Google Hangouts. Any user can simply type /hangout and a link appears to a Google Hangout that everyone can quickly jump into for a quick face-to-face meeting. Each chat channel is also searchable, too—so any piece of information is never lost!

I’m starting to see a theme of my mobile app reviews: teamwork and collaboration. Having people a click away is becoming the norm, and younger people are growing up expecting this. “Audiences expect higher levels of interactivity and programs tailored to individual needs” (p. 13). Mobility is highly important and will continue to be a crucial factor for the next generational workforce.

Specific 21st Century Skills Utilized (p. 25-28)

  • Learning and Innovation Skills
    • Critical Thinking and Problem Solving
    • Creativity and Innovation
    • Communication and Collaboration
    • Cross-Disciplinary Thinking
    • Visual Literacy
    • Basic Literacy
  • Information, Media and Technology Skills
    • Information Literacy
    • Media Literacy
    • ICT Literacy
  • 21st Century Themes
    • Global Awareness
    • Financial, Economic, Business, and Entrepreneurial Literacy
  • Life and Career Skills
    • Flexibility and Adaptability
    • Initiative and Self-Direction
    • Social and Cross-Cultural Skills
    • Productivity and Accountability
    • Leadership and Responsibility

Google Hangouts – Mobile App Review (3 of 5)

Reviewed by: Zach Lonsinger

Details

  • Seller: Google, Inc.
  • Category: Social Networking
  • Current Version: 5.1.0
  • Current Version Updated: Oct. 5, 2015
  • Release Date: May 11, 2013 (1.0.0)
  • iOS, Android
  • Cost: FREE

Review

nexusae0_hangouts

Google Hangouts is classified as a “social networking” app, but in my opinion, it is far from that. It is more of a tool to instantly connect with other people. Others may argue that connecting with people is, in itself, social networking. When I think of social networking, I think of twitter and facebook. Basically, Hangouts allows for quick video calls and messaging. By itself, not too great—just another video and messaging tool. However, it comes in mighty handy when a small group of students is virtually working on a Google Doc and need to have a quick F2F (face-to-face) meeting or instant message. Hangouts is the messaging box built into Google Docs. It also allows for seamless integration of video chats. However, one limitation is it only allows for 10 participants (15 for Google education accounts).

I briefly mentioned a few education-use scenarios above. Now I want to focus more on a professional-administrative use. We currently use Hangouts in the Nursing IT department as a way for users to quickly get a hole of us for IT troubleshooting. This is usually during a class, which requires immediate response. Instead of giving out our personal cell numbers, Hangouts allows you to create a Google phone number via Google Voice and sync it to Hangouts. We then posted QR codes in every classroom with the Google phone number, which when texted, sends a message to our Hangouts app. This could be used for teachers who don’t want to give out their phone numbers, but want to be available for texting to their students.

Again, this app blurs the line between informal and formal learning environments. Being able to connect with other peers anywhere, anytime allows learning to spill over to the student’s’ home life. A quick message here, a quick video meetup there—before you know it, the group has figured out tomorrow’s assignment through a myriad of Google Hangout messages and video chats.

Specific 21st Century Skills Utilized (p. 25-28)

  • Learning and Innovation Skills
    • Creativity and Innovation
    • Communication and Collaboration
    • Visual Literacy
    • Basic Literacy
  • Information, Media and Technology Skills
    • Information Literacy
    • ICT Literacy
  • Life and Career Skills
    • Flexibility and Adaptability
    • Initiative and Self-Direction
    • Social and Cross-Cultural Skills
    • Productivity and Accountability
    • Leadership and Responsibility

Google Drive – Mobile App Review (2 of 5)

Reviewed by: Zach Lonsinger

Details

  • Seller: Google, Inc.
  • Category: Productivity
  • Current Version: 4.2
  • Current Version Updated: Oct. 1, 2015
  • Release Date: July 24, 2013 (1.5.0)
  • iOS, Android
  • Cost: FREE

Review

Google-Drive-Icon

Google Drive is cloud storage at its finest. I’m a user of several cloud services (e.g., Dropbox, Box, iCloud, Drive). They all have their advantages and disadvantages, but what I like most about Drive is the seamless integration of Google Docs, Sheets, and Slides. Not only can you store Google files, but users can store any files they choose and also invite others to view, edit, or leave comments on any of their files or folders.

One great use of Google Drive for education is the power of sharing. This could be used for an entire class of 500, or even small groups of 3-5. Users can create central repositories of documents and folders, and even have sub-folders within those for document storage and organization. Permissions could also be set up to allow anyone to add documents to create an ultimate repository of information, that everyone can access.

Similar to the Google Docs App Review, Drive shares the similar privacy concerns. College-age learners posit no immediate concerns, but high school age and younger would raise privacy concerns. Utilizing an app like Google Drive, a cloud storage service, one must acknowledge Turkle’s “always-on/always-on-us” idea. Storing information in Drive means that anything the user wants is always at his or her fingertips, on any device, at any moment. Group projects would always be a swipe away. Does this start to blur the line between school and personal lives, similar to the “work and personal life” argument? Or is this something we shouldn’t worry about? Learning, after all, should be a lifelong pursuit.

Specific 21st Century Skills Utilized (p. 25-28)

  • Learning and Innovation Skills
    • Critical Thinking and Problem Solving
    • Creativity and Innovation
    • Communication and Collaboration
    • Visual Literacy
    • Scientific and Numerical Literacy
    • Cross-Disciplinary Thinking
    • Basic Literacy
  • Information, Media and Technology Skills
    • Information Literacy
    • Media Literacy
    • ICT Literacy
  • 21st Century Themes
    • Global Awareness
    • Financial, Economic, Business, and Entrepreneurial Literacy
  • Life and Career Skills
    • Flexibility and Adaptability
    • Initiative and Self-Direction
    • Social and Cross-Cultural Skills
    • Productivity and Accountability
    • Leadership and Responsibility

Google Docs — Mobile App Review (1 of 5)

Reviewed by: Zach Lonsinger

Details

  • Seller: Google, Inc.
  • Category: Productivity
  • Current Version: 1.2015.38205
  • Current Version Updated: Sep. 28, 2015
  • Release Date: Apr. 26, 2014 (1.0.0)
  • iOS, Android
  • Cost: FREE

Review

Docs-icon

Google Docs is a mobile app that allows the user to create documents that save automatically in the cloud, and are accessed by the user’s Google account via Google Drive. Google Docs is designed for ease of collaboration. Users can share the document with other users and even with the general public.

There are many use case with Google Docs in the classroom. I have personally used it in several graduate-level courses, as well as at conferences. For example, I used Google Docs in a F2F (face-to-face) class a few semesters ago for a semester-long group project. We organized our thoughts in the Google Doc, which kept a running record of all of our readings, blog posts, questions, and projects throughout the course of the entire semester. At the end of the semester, we were left with an artifact over 100 pages long. This is an invaluable resource that I still reference today. Another use case is at conferences. At the last few conferences I have attended, I have created a ‘public’ Google Doc and tweeted it out using the conference hashtag. I then curated it throughout the entire conference, adding breakout session headers and allowing users to keep collaborative notes. This proved to be a great resource that caught on like wildfire. This allowed conference attendees to view notes of other sessions that they were unable to attend.

For college-age learners, this poses no immediate privacy concerns. The majority of college students already have a Google account. Using this app for high school age and lower gets muddy. The district would either have to be already using Google apps or have Google accounts for their students, or the individual teacher would have to get parental permission for the students to have Google accounts. However, I feel that the advantages of using Google Docs are greater than the disadvantages. The ease and compatibility with mobile devices offers a sense of mobility for learning. Students can access Docs anywhere they want with their smartphone or on a computer, too. This will blur the line between informal and formal learning environments, creating an environment of learning—no matter where the student is.

Specific 21st Century Skills Utilized (p. 25-28)

  • Learning and Innovation Skills
    • Creativity and Innovation
    • Communication and Collaboration
    • Visual Literacy
    • Basic Literacy
  • Information, Media and Technology Skills
    • Information Literacy
    • Media Literacy
    • ICT Literacy
  • Life and Career Skills
    • Flexibility and Adaptability
    • Initiative and Self-Direction
    • Social and Cross-Cultural Skills
    • Productivity and Accountability
    • Leadership and Responsibility