Monthly Archives: November 2013

Lesson 10-Final Blog post, final thoughts

1 Reply

Designing a curriculum with mobile devices allows many options to create and experience for the learner. Throughout our class readings we have addressed various issues in developing and using mobile devices in informal, formal and ubiquitous environments. Various factors such as the economic viability of the reducing costs of mobile devices, the accessibility to dependable Internet connection and the shift from absorption of knowledge to synthesizers and creators of new content is now achievable with mobile devices. The ability to connect asynchronously over time and distance, and additionally, connecting and expressing ideas through creative multimedia and social networks provides us with new ways to recognize and validate that learning has occurred through new forms of assessment.

Interestingly, enough aesthetics of designing the mobile device and software is a factor in the use of mobile devices.  Evangelos Triantafillou shows a need between design and or display of content. The conclusive recommendations, “Images on PDAs should be carefully selected taking into consideration the small resolution and size of the device” (Triantafillou, E., Georgiadou,E., Economides, A., pg.1329).  This recommendation shows the need for alterations to the design of the content to maximize the learning and assessment potential during the study.

Furthermore, the aesthetics of of mobile technology is shown to improve trust in product brands (Yung-Ming Li, Yung-Shao Yeh, (2010). Thus, one may assume that this trust is transferable to the design of an instructional content. After all, the software application could be considered a product with a company brand.

Now, we have seen that mobile devices allow people to develop online identities. However, the use of the tool may exhibit a different identity, the power user. In this course we have not explored the multi-faceted identities of the mobile user. Zhong explores this disposition in mobile users. How do we explore the designing of educational mobile learning for these users compared to those not considered power users? What is the difference in learning experiences between the two? (Zhong, B.,2013)

As more research is done, more understanding of mobile learning will occur. The question is whether the mobile device or the ubiquitous nature of the device or the combination of the two, enhance the experience, thus improving the learning potential of learners in general. Mobile learning is a new tool in the educational arsenal. In my personal opinion, the tool is limited to the effectiveness of the instructor. The difference now is, the instructor maybe the teacher, the instructional designer or the app developer and even the combination of all. Even though a learner may teach themselves with a tool, the tool is what another uses to facilitate the information.

 

Citations

 

Triantafillou, E., Georgiadou,E., Economides, A., (2008).  The design and evaluation of a computerized adaptive test on mobile devices, Computers & Education, 50(4), 1319-1330, (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131506001965)

Yung-Ming Li, Yung-Shao Yeh, (2010). Increasing trust in mobile commerce through design aesthetics, Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 673-684,(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563210000063)
Zhong, B. (2013). From smartphones to iPad: Power users’ disposition
toward mobile media devices. Computers in human behavior, 29(4),
1742-1748.doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.02.016

Patient Education with Mobile Devices

3 Replies

Integrating mobile learning in a higher education or adult learning situation will become prevalent in future according to Park (2011). The issue of transactional distance will remain between learners and teachers or instructional designers. The medium being content knowledge is the filter or medium with which the barrier lies. Scaffolding of this content allows communication between the learner and instructors. Activities and social networking may help facilitate mobile learning. (Park, 2011)

Additionally, instituting m-learning is dependent on the mobile device and software capabilities. The limitations Park (2011) mentions must be overcome. Such devices as the i-Pad Air overcome issues of small screens, weight, memory and short battery life. The App-Store and the ease with which software developers are developing platforms to create Apps with ease will solve the issue of application issues. The other issues of networks, environment, security and radiation are being addressed with that work in tandem with tablets and smart-phones. Such as waterproof cases, Bluetooth devices, and even privacy screens and software security. (Park, 2011)

Incorporating mobile devices say in a hospital setting for education can be done seamlessly. Things like a pen and paper or charts would not be needed in a patient’s room. A tablet could be left in a room and information could be accessed with a passcode for the patient. Or a protective case would allow cleaning to reduce contamination and mobility from room to room.  A nurse or a doctor could bring in a tablet to review x-rays or labs and offer tutorials at bedside and simply sanitize the tablet upon leaving. Patient education could be delivered virtually with tablets, instead of clunky videos. The cost of VCRs, DVD players and network video databases would not be necessary with mobile tablets for the staff to use.

Many hospitals have large PCs and monitors in each room attached to walls. Desktop PCs will no longer be an issue with a secure Wi-Fi network allowing the medical staff to access information. Doctors could use their own mobile devices that access the secure network. The patient could bring their personal device and access a separate network for personal use. And even use apps to educate them on procedures and diagnoses they are going through.

This would meet authenticity, personalization, and allow collaboration among staff and patients. This meets Kearny’s (2012) three distinctive features of m-learning. Furthermore, questionnaires given to patients and checklist given to medical staff will allow them plan out a course of care. Give them opportunities to reflect on the course of treatment. These questionnaires could even be used to collect data on understanding on the part of the patient, emotional state, expectations, and satisfaction in real-time. Best of all the data can be aggregated immediately and allow for immediate intervention. This meets Looi’s (2010) ideas of seamless mobile learning.

These are only a few of the applications mobile device can be applied to in a hospital setting. Educating medical students, and staff is not the first choice. But using mobile devices to educate patients and allow the staff to become the teachers or learning facilitators would be the overall most beneficial model of m-learning in the hospital.

 

 

 

Works Cited

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

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

Park, Y. (2011). A pedagogical framework for mobile learning: Categorizing educational applications of mobile technologies into four types. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(2).

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 link to access article. This article is not in the course reserves. http://www.researchinlearningtechnology.net/index.php/rlt/article/view/14406.