As a post-secondary educator working at two different college satellite locations, I encounter my fair share of challenges.  Although my daily struggle to support content delivery is far from the educational facilitation challenges experienced in developing countries or isolated locations, the endeavor is not without its share of trials.  Reaching learners by supporting their engagement anytime, anywhere has become a 21st century requirement.  Every environment is a learning environment; the problem is, sometimes we are so limited (personally, professionally, institutionally, technologically) that we fail to acknowledge this essential truth.  The implementation of mobile technology across contexts enables us to facilitate lifelong learning even in settings of remote accessibility and limited resources.

Kearney et. al. identified three concepts of particular importance in supporting learning through mobile devices – personalization, authenticity, and collaboration (p. 8). Personalization allows learners independence to engage with content in their chosen place and at their own pace; authenticity provides “real world relevance and personal meaning” (p. 9) to the learner; and collaboration offers the learner the opportunity to make “rich connections to other people and resources” (p. 10) through the interactive affordances of a mobile device. These three precepts exist synchronously within the time-space continuum. A seamless learning framework, therefore, according to Looi et. al., “bridges private and public learning spaces where learning happens as both individual and collective efforts and across different contexts” (p. 156).  Enacting this framework within the learning environments I facilitate (two college satellite locations) is challenging in that the community-level of the framework is already once-removed due to the outpost nature of the facilities; working within the parameters of locations sans the resources of their primary institutions presents both learners and facilitator with a sense of disconnection through which mobile technology possess the potential to remedy if its affordances can be embraced as effective and beneficial by learners.

In choosing a third article to examine this week, I opted for the Zolfo et. al. piece about training in resource limited settings. While the study itself is focused on providing adequate and appropriate professional resources and networking capabilities through mobile devices to healthcare workers in secluded health ministry areas of Peru, its implications that “technology was used bridging the gap between formal and experiential learning” (p. 5) can be generalized and applied to any remote center from which learners are compelled to connect with a larger, more endowed base. The Zolfo et. al. study reinforces to me that the utilization of mobile technology – whether through my LMS app, an online library tool, the college intranet, or even a basic email function – can help facilitate the socio-cultural facet (Kearney’s “collaboration” component and Looi’s “community” aspect of a seamless learning framework) of the learner’s experience.

Mobile technology offers the provision of hope to all learners in the 2st century, especially to those for whom standard formal settings are limited or nonexistent.  Barrier-free learning can make the world our classroom.

(Watch this example of teacher as mobile learning environment!)

References

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.

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.

Zolfo, M., Iglesias, D., Kiyan, C., Echevarria, J., Fucay, L., Llacsahuanga, E., de Waard, I., et al. (2010). Mobile learning for HIV/AIDS healthcare worker training in resource-limited settings. AIDS research and therapy, 7, 35. doi:10.1186/1742-6405-7-35.

Eighty-five to ninety-nine percent of college students use Facebook (Junco, p. 162), and although that statistic may not come as an incredible shock to anyone, the fact that the social media platform is terrifically underutilized as a mobile learning environment is surprising. And while many college learners express a readiness to engage with learning content within the network, their instructional counterparts seem less than zealous about the undertaking – with an instructor in-class usage rate of 4% (Junco, p. 163). How’s that for a digital divide?! With ubiquitous Facebook engagement among college students comes the opportunity to create a designed learning environment through which these learners can effectively engage with instructional content via social media. And although this prospect is not without its hazards, the potential of Facebook as a platform from which to deliver meaningful informal learning opportunities has yet to be fully explored within post-secondary academia.

Hew identified nine motives for students to use Facebook: maintaining existing relationships; meeting new people; having fun; making oneself more popular; passing time; expressing oneself; learning; managing tasks; and engaging in activism (pp. 664-665); the primary engagement purpose, however, remained that of a social nature, with learning endeavors frequently confined to basic information-seeking among classmates or peers. Hew also cites studies that yielded findings that in comparison to non-users Facebook users have significantly lower GPA’s and spend fewer hours studying per week (p. 667). This data is not necessarily in contrast with Junco’s findings that while Facebook utilization is negatively predictive of academic engagement, it has a positive correlation with co-curricular participation (p. 168). Perhaps from this information we educators could glean insight into the social learning potential of the network. Given students’ proclivity to access social media anytime, anywhere, is it possible to incorporate learning opportunities within the social environment that support academic pursuits?

Many institutions (my own included) enforce policies regarding mobile technology use in the classroom; these policies are frequently driven by concerns about academic honesty and student disengagement. In their study of laptop multitasking among college students in a traditional classroom environment, Sana et. al. found that students who made use of a laptop to multitask during lecture achieved lower test scores, as did their distracted peers within close visual range of the device (p. 29). “In order to effectively integrate technology into classrooms,” the team asserts, “we must continue to examine the consequences – both positive and negative – of technology use on learning” (p. 31). I fully agree with their assertion, and feel strongly that many distracted multitaskers in the classroom are disengaged from instruction because they are engaging with ever-alluring social media, particularly Facebook. Isn’t it time we stop avoiding the issue and face a future where social media use and academic engagement mesh to create a richer, more realistic 21^st century learning environment?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJUOa7VCkk4

Suggested Resources

The Experience of Using Facebook as an Educational Tool

Incorporating and Accounting for Social Media in Education

Social Media as Learning Tools

References

Hew, K. F. (2011). Students’ and teachers’ use of Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 662-676. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.11.020.

Junco, R. (2012). The relationship between frequency of Facebook use, participation in Facebook activities, and student engagement. Computers & Education, 58(1), 162-171. Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.004.

Sana, F., Weston, T., & Cepeda, N. J. (2013). Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers. (pages 24-31).

Other Works Consulted

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.

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. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00846.x.

The digital age has bestowed many gifts upon the modern classroom, perhaps the greatest being the breadth with which we can now define agency among learners. Moreover, ubiquitous computing has afforded educators the opportunity to become innovators; no longer encapsulated inside the four walls of a traditional classroom, teachers possess the ability to create seamless learning ventures for their students across contexts through the utilization of mobile technology. E-books, badging, and augmented reality gamification are just a few technical content deployment strategies that can be utilized to promote, enhance, and extend the learning experience. Learning anytime, anywhere is the new norm, and the rules of learner engagement have evolved dramatically from the traditional sage-on-the-stage to the nascent guide-on-the-side.

A hallmark of new forms of learner engagement with mobile tools seems to be personalization. Davidson and Carliner (p. 714) describe three basic components essential to the delivery of electronic books: hardware (reading devices), software (rendering modality), and content (text, graphics, AV); within this framework of considerations, the authors suggest a number of educational purposes for e-books to include textbooks, hybrid (text/video) how-to manuals, research tools, and online integrated instruction (p. 715). Within and beyond these considerations and applications lies the opportunity for learners to engage with content in a way that not only allows for the consumption of instructional material but promotes the informal access of and interaction with new information. This represents a trend that continues with both badging and augmented reality: facilitating learning journeys that provide meaningful freedom and personalization. Martin et. al. present a post-secondary example from UW-Madison wherein students engage in a situated learning activity called Folklore that challenges them to engage with local landmarks in a culturally meaningful way (pp. 38-40); the AR endeavor not only facilitated learner content engagement, it also strengthened a sense of community among students. Similarly, Gamrat et. al.’s study of a teacher professional development program in which virtual stamps and badges were employed to acknowledge individual accomplishments reinforced the dually personal and professional nature of individual training objectives; in describing outcomes for participants, the researchers specifically noted that one teacher “being empowered by her own decisions” (p. 8) was able to acquire additional content knowledge necessary for her position, and that other teachers were able to network beneficially based on the badging system’s customization options. In short, engagement with mobile tools offers the learner an experience that is simultaneously personal and universal.

Learning is a beautiful and uniquely personal journey. While the incorporation of mobile technology offers learners the opportunity to connect on a global level, it also affords us the opportunity to engage with content in ways that are deeply meaningful and individually satisfying. This is the crux of 21^st century learning. These are the new rules of engagement.

Recommendations for Further Reading

Impactful Innovation and Student Agency

The Digital Learner: A New Breed of Learner in the Digital Age

Inclusion in the 21st Century Classroom: Differentiating with Technology

References

Davidson, A. L., & Carliner, S. (2014). E-books for educational uses. In Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 713-722). Springer New York.

Gamrat, C., Zimmerman, H. T., Dudek, J., & Peck, K. (2014). Personalized workplace learning: An exploratory study on digital badging within a teacher professional development program. (pages 1136-1148).

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

• • • Name of app: Pinterest
    • Reviewed by Crystal Donlan
    • Details: 2010; iOS/Android/Windows
    • Cost: Free
    • Review: Pinterest offers users the opportunity to create virtual bulletin boards wherein they can create interest-driven categories (“boards”) onto which they “pin” content in the form of images, collages, and small media bytes. I have utilized this app in a learning environment by creating boards associated with different areas of study for my job as a learning specialist; I continue to develop my content collections in categories such as notetaking, learning styles, and metacognition and often utilize these boards to develop both individualized tutoring content and workshops. Pinterest supports the concept of the affinity-identity in that its boards are user-driven based on interest; the app also fosters creativity and innovation as well as ICT (information/communications/technology) literacy in that it promotes the use of digital technology to access, manage, and create content.
    • http://•https://www.pinterest.com/pin/424112489888803925/

• • • Name of app: LiveBinders
    • Reviewed by Crystal Donlan
    • Details: 2006; iOS/Android/Windows
    • Cost: Free
    • Review: LiveBinders offers users the opportunity to create digital three-ring binders for content organizing and information sharing. I have utilized this app in a learning environment to present a fairly large amount of content for a f2f writing course that does not offer a textbook; through the app I was able first to organize course content in topical sequence by creating tabs for different writing modalities, and then to offer my learners access to the associated content. LiveBinders helps bridge formal and informal learning, and fosters both visual literacy and information literacy in that it supports the recognition, use, evaluation, and management of content.
    • http://•http://www.livebinders.com/play/play?id=2202817

• • • Name of app: LinkedIn
    • Reviewed by Crystal Donlan
    • Details: 2003; iOS/Android/Windows
    • Cost: Free(mium)
    • Review: LinkedIn is a professional social networking site that offers users the opportunity to create a career-oriented personal profile, develop a professional network, search for jobs, join and/or follow interest groups, and engage in online training. I have utilized this app in a learning environment by referring my learners to online training opportunities and also by presenting both my colleagues and my students with newsfeed articles and personal publication content. LinkedIn provides a forum wherein the institution-identity and the affinity-identity intersect; the app also supports media literacy by promoting the creation and distribution of media expression, and entrepreneurial literacy through its presentation of career productivity content.
    • https://www.linkedin.com/in/crystal-donlan-980786a6/

• • • Name of app: edX
    • Reviewed by Crystal Donlan
    • Details: 2012; iOS/Android/Windows
    • Cost: Free(mium)
    • Review: edX is a MOOC (massive open online course) provider that offers its users the opportunity to engage in free or affordably priced university-level content. I have utilized this app in a learning environment both by introducing site content to my learners in f2f class settings and by taking courses for my own professional and personal development. edX spans a number of 21^st century skills including creativity and innovation, critical thinking and problem-solving, and communication and collaboration through its promotion of accessible education to “everyone, everywhere;” the app also supports the exploration of identity across perspectives in an informal learning environment.
    • https://courses.edx.org/courses/course-v1:University_of_TorontoX+INQ101x+3T2016/course/

• • • Name of app: Coursera
    • Reviewed by Crystal Donlan
    • Details: 2012; iOS/Android/Windows
    • Cost: $29-$99/course, or $49/month
    • Review: Coursera is a MOOC (massive open online course) provider that offers its users the opportunity of low-cost (formerly free) access to university-level content. I have utilized this app in a learning environment by enrolling in courses for my own professional development. Coursera stimulates initiative and self-direction as well as productivity and accountability by providing affordable self-development options in a wide range of content areas; the app also promotes learning and innovation skills across the 21^st century skills framework by providing high-interest content that empowers users to think creatively, reason effectively, and solve problems.
    • https://www.fastcompany.com/3000042/how-coursera-free-online-education-service-will-school-us-all