For the final project, my primary goal is to create a new app that can support students’ collaboration and interaction in the learning process within one subject matter. However, I know my knowledge and experience concerning the design principle of a successful mobile app is not sufficient to support me in creating a well-designed one. Therefore, for this week’s reading, I selected materials that are related to mobile app design principles and social interactive features.

Young students using iPads: App design and content influences on their learning pathways, by Fallon (2013), employs qualitative methodology (case study method) to examine how the design and content features of mobile apps used on iPads impact young students’ learning pathways when using iPads independently for problem solving tasks. On of the feature for the research design, as indicated by Fallon, was the recording method which resorts to a beta-release open-marketplace app, Display Recorder, to record learners trajectory and activities with selected 45 mobile apps for data analysis. After data collection and analysis, Fallon categorizes the findings into three concepts: content and design features supporting learning, content and design features impeding learning, and design parameters and learning. At the end of the paper, Fallon (2013) proposes careful attention should be paid to the design and content of mobile apps if the undisputed motivation from using mobile devices, including iPads, iPhone, and etc., is to be transformed into thoughtful engagement and productive learning. The quotes below are from Fallon’s paper (2013) but I think it is illuminative to the design of mobile apps:

• communicating learning objectives in ways young students can access and understand;

• providing smooth and distraction-free pathways towards achieving goals;

• including accessible and understandable instructions and teaching elements;

• incorporating formative, corrective feedback;

• combining an appropriate blend of game, practise and learning components;

• providing interaction parameters matched to the learning characteristics of the target student group (pp. 519).

A comparative analysis of a game-based mobile learning model in low-socioeconomic communities of India, by Kim et al. (2012) explores how children living in underdeveloped regions, with low levels of exposure to technology, come to use and learn from mobile technology, while also investigating which factor promote self-directed learning from mobile devices. Children’s aptitude with technology is widely considered as much higher than their teachers and the speed of their adoption of technology can be astonishing to researchers. That is also one reason for me to focus my interests in learning with mobile devices for young childhood students. The research recruits 210 children aging from 6-14 years old from two specific community settings, urban slums and rural villages, and both qualitative (grounded theory) and quantitative methods to examine how group size, exposure to technology, and gender impacts their speed of technology adoption. Age is also one factor that designer should consider but for this research it was overlooked because of real-life issues. Through the examination, researchers proposed four phases of technology adoption for young children, exploration, recognition, interaction, and iterations. Besides, findings from this research are also meaningful for macro implementation of learning with mobile devices within a scope, or larger range, of a nation. Children are proven that can be good at technology even though they have seldom exposure to it before and more previous exposure tend to contribute to better mastery of technology. They can solve the problem with better integration and use of technology in a shorter time. However, in the process of mastery, multiple factors like group size, gender, and probably age may affect their process, either impede or accelerate. The key to facilitate the process is the coordination between the design and contents and the learning goals. The research indicate one drawback for the game of Fire Rescue Math (FRM) is the problematic target door. Students are confused with the target door and they cannot figure out what their goals are, which also reflect the role of learning goal in the design of an app or educational game.

The last paper, Social anxiety and technology: Face-to-face communication versus technological communication among teens, by Pierce (2009) mainly investigates teenagers’ use of socially interactive technologies (SITs), such as online social sites, cell phone/text messaging, and instant messaging, as well as the role of anxiety plays on how teenages communicate with others virtually or face-to-face. The findings of this research is meaningful for me because of my focus on the feature of social interaction for design of mobile apps. The research certifies that SITs have been a replacement of face-to-face communication and the use of SITs may reduce the face-to-face interaction. Additionally, as of the social anxiety, findings provide credible reference for designers who intend to create an app specifically targets at one certain group. Girls are more possible to social anxiety and females with social anxiety tend to be more attached with SITs in order to interact with others. Finally, females feel more comfortable with the use of SITs as a way of communication. Further researches concerning how to improve design of social patterns for SITs devices so that males will be more involved in the technological interaction can be expected.

In my opinion, learning with mobile devices features interactivity (social interaction), mobility (seamless learning), convenience (extreme learning), and individuality (self-regulated learning). After reading through all reading materials, I want to further confirm with this idea but one key element for the success of learning with mobile technology is the access to devices and technologies. Unequal access will bring about a great many controversial issues.

Reference:

Falloon, G. (2013). Young students using iPads: App design and content influences on their learning pathways. Computers & Education, 68, 505-521.

Kim, P., Buckner, E., Kim, H., Makany, T., Taleja, N., & Parikh, V. (2012). A comparative analysis of a game-based mobile learning model in low-socioeconomic communities of India. International Journal of Educational Development, 32(2), 329-340. Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.ijedudev.2011.05.008

Pierce, T. (2009). Social anxiety and technology: Face-to-face communication versus technological communication among teens. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(6), 1367-1372. Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.06.003

This week I really achieved the mobile learning in the practice with my iPhone since I was on travel for two consecutive conferences. With the smartphone in hand, I can complete reading materials and read peers’ post. This practice also helps me realize the seamless learning or ubiquitous learning that mobile devices bring to education. However, one concern then emerges is how to efficiently utilize the convenience and mobility endowed from the technologies. It is true that learners can interact with teacher and peers and also receive knowledge in a real context. However, it also challenges learners to face various “noise” within the context. For example, when I read at the airport, I have to consider the power issue of my device and the reading process may be also interrupted by noise such as baby crying, crew announcement, passengers’ consultation, and etc. Learners’ capacity of control on the inquiry process should be respected as one integral part in academic success though it has already been proven that the integration of mobile technology benefits learners and knowledge construction.

In addition to reflection of my experience, I really want to admire the quality of reading materials in this week. Learning with mobile devices demonstrates its potential in the area of education, but the current research still requires a more comprehensive pedagogical framework, which is also the emphasis of this week’s reading materials.

Looi, Seow, Zhang, So, Chen, & Wong (2010) investigate the potential of integrating mobile devices into education for seamless learning spaces. Seamless learning spaces feature with the continuity of the learning experience across different scenarios or contexts, and emerge from the availability of one device or more per student. The integration of mobile technologies is expected to trigger the shift from the “didactic teacher-centered” to “participatory student-centered” pedagogy. Furthermore, it allows learners to interact with the real-life context that will help address the problems of excessive de-contextualized information in the traditional education. In order to provide a solid theoretical foundation for seamless learning, this research examines the methodological and technical issues around the seamless learning design researches. Looi et al. (2010) employ the distributed cognition theory as the theoretical framework which consists of three principles, “they are distributed across the members of the social group”; “they are distributed over time;” and “the operation of a cognitive system involves coordination between internal and external (material or environmental) structure” (Hollan, Hutchins & Kirsch, 2001). For the seamless learning researches, the main method is design-based research but the research is restricted by time and space and no single methodology can meet the demand. The research on the seamless learning will rely on the “ethnographic methods, self-report procedures, constant comparisons and sustained observations, as well as analyzing quantifiable measures.” (Looi et al., 2010) The seamless learning research also faces the challenges from technology and assessment. In particular, the assessment issue always puzzles the instructional practice with new technologies or educational innovation but it is an integral component in its future promotion of new innovations.

Park (2011) lends the theoretical foundation from transactional distance theory to classify the mobile apps into four mainly categories. New definition of mobile learning is modified as mediated learning through mobile technology (Winter, 2006) and the mobility of the mobile technology further decreases the dependence on the context and makes it possible for the seamless learning. However, as mentioned above related researches still lack the theoretical framework. According to transactional distance theory, we classify mobile apps into four categories, high transactional distance and socialized mobile learning activity (I think MOOCs should fall here), high transactional distance and individualized mobile learning activity (an extension of e-learning), low transactional distance and socialized mobile learning activity (e-learning), and low transactional distance and individualized mobile learning activity (blended learning). Kearney, Schuck, Burden, & Aubusson (2012) mainly focus on the three features of learning with mobile devices, authenticity, personalization, and collaboration. Based on those three features, authors established the new framework after refining in terms of practice and more details about the features are discussed. For example, authenticity includes the contextualization and situatedness and personalization addresses agency and customization. Furthermore, collaboration explores the issues of data sharing and conversation. Authors further discussed the refined framework and explored its potential in the research of learning with mobile devices. Another book I read for this week is from Dr. Curt Bonk about extreme learning (It is a great honor to meet him face-to-face in AECT last week and talk a little bit about MOOCs.) Extreme learning is a subgroup of informal learning and it addresses the learning in extreme settings, like in the boat, taking the bus, and etc. With the promotion of mobile technologies, researches based on the extreme learning are quite in need.

In sum, mobile devices can help learners decrease the reliance over the single context and are expected to achieve seamless learning. Furthermore, the integration can facilitate the collaboration and personalized design. However, a more comprehensive and efficient research theoretical framework is in need.

Reference:

Bonk, C. J. (2012). Plenary talk: Technology-Enhanced Teaching: From Tinkering to Tottering to Totally Extreme Learning. Proceedings of the 1^st International Conference on Open and Distance Learning, Manila, the Philippines

Hollan, J., Hutchins, E. & Kirsch, D. (2001). Distributed cognition: toward a new foundation for human-computer interaction research. In J. M. Carroll (Ed.), Human computer interaction in the new millennium (pp. 75–94). New York: ACM Press.

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

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).

Winters, N. (2006). What is mobile learning? In M. Sharples (Ed.), Big issues in mobile learning: Report of a workshop by the kaleidoscope network of excellence mobile learning initiative. University of Nottingham.

This week’s reading provides me a direct understanding of the technological integration of mobile devices into the learning experiences. The affordance of mobile devices, e.g., computing power, connectivity, and mobility, extends the range of learning environment, facilitates the social construction for collective knowledge, and enhances the learning in authentic contexts. However, the issues of adoption, availability, assessment, and etc. still challenge its future in the realm of learning.

Hsu and Ching’s (2012) paper investigates the practice of integrating mobile microblogging in an online course to promote learning in authentic contexts. Microblogging, as blogging, enables users for personal publication and interactive communication but it has a lower maximum of words. Participants in this study are required to have a smartphone or mobile device for this course and a university grant will provide support for those who did not have one to ensure they can meet the technological requirement. Participants post at least one tweet each week about the design topic and also comment on others’ posts, which lasts for nine weeks. Those tweets are used as the major source for the data analysis and the result indicates that microblogging can “promote learning in authentic contexts”, “reinforce formal learning with informal learning”, and also “enhance social learning”. Even though the character limit, microblogging increases the deep conversation through short but frequent exchanges. However, several challenges are also recognized such as the availability of mobile devices, the restriction of hashtag, and etc. The issue of availability reengaged me into the through of “digital equity” and further extend my understanding on the equity. Microblogging and other mobile learning strategies highly rely on mobile devices which causes learning goals cannot be achieved without the basic equipment. Additionally, not all the users are interested in the upgrading of the device, which will also bring about the decrease of the learning outcome.

Martin, Pastore, and Snider (2012) examine the instructional practice of incorporating mobile web applications in the learning process. The goal is to enable participants to create a systematic mobile instructional system with Dreamweaver. Participants are initially required to upload a 10-minute instructional movie clip of the subject matter that they want to focus on. Then the instructor show participants the basic techniques on how to use Dreamweaver to create instructional materials and provide scaffolding for participants to move on. With those scaffolding, participants work on their websites individually and then present to the class for feedback in order to complete the collective construction. At the end of the research, participants are expected to reflect their design practice and three challenges concerning the design issues are highlighted from their responses, e.g., small size of screen, usability (simplified navigation and organization), and the design of contents (concerning the size of screen and downloading speed). Based on the research project, researchers proposed several suggestions on the design of instructional practice with mobile device. The first is about the mobile development and delivery methods and researchers discussed the choice between mobile apps and mobile websites in perspectives of accessibility, development, and functionality. The second addresses the product testing which concerns whether the free online space is available for users to test their design. Finally, researchers indicate that it is essential for users to test their products outside the school/classroom. They argued that for the mobile websites, similar emulation program cannot satisfy the current need and more precise emulation programs are in need.

In summary, the instructional practice of integrating mobile devices helps students combine formal learning with informal learning, which promotes learning in authentic contexts, enhances social learning, and intensifies the metacognition.

My research interests address K-12 learning as well as adult learning. In addition to those two examples, I will share two examples of incorporating mobile devices into learning practice. The first one is used in the language learning (see attachment). The success of language learning is limited by the time that students engage in language learning activities outside the classroom and the absence of opportunities and motivation in practical contexts (Liu, Tan, and Chu, 2010). Therefore, researchers expect to construct a context-aware immersive learning context supported by Augmented Reality (AR) technologies to facilitate language learning. AR is an excellent educational application in terms of its ability to embed digital objects into a real environment (Hughes, Stapleton, Hughes, & Smith, 2005). Liu, et al. (2010) proposed a QR code and AR-supported English learning environment, called Handheld English Language Learning Organization (HELLO). HELLO system relied on the HELLO server and m-Tools and allowed students to acquire context-aware resources with their mobile phones and WLAN. With the detected identification code sent from students’ mobile phone when they took pictures to decrypt QR code, the server located students and sent the context-aware contents back to their phones. HELLO system turned out to be rather feasible and promising in Taiwan after a pilot study.  For example, if an instructor of English Learning Center (ELC) made a QR code of English reading materials and sent it to the server, students could finish their reading tasks even when they were waiting in lines for their food in the cafeteria.

The second one is about K-12 children’s reading but it is still in the phase of proposal. Motivation is considered as one integral component of children’s academic success including reading activity. However, research indicates that children’s reading motivation decreases with the increase of their ages, which fuels the phenomenon, “fourth grade slump”. In order to increase children’s reading motivation, the development team founds the subscription service called Bookboard and also creates its mobile app compatible with iPad. Bookboard incorporates game mechanics, parental involvement, and metacognition, which are supposed to increase children’s self-efficacy, stimulate intrinsic motivation, and help them define prosocial goals. Since the app is located on iPad, children can complete reading activity anytime and/or anywhere. Above all, this app demonstrates great potential to be incorporated in the instructional practices.

Reference:

Bookboard, INC (2013) Bookboard.com.

Hsu, Y. C., & Ching, Y. H. (2012). Mobile microblogging: Using Twitter and mobile devices in an online course to promote learning in authentic contexts. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13 (4), 211-227.

Hughes, C. E., Stapleton, C. B., Hughes, D. E., & Smith, E. M. (2005). Mixed reality in education, entertainment, and training. Computer Graphics and Applications, IEEE, 25(6), 24-30.

Liu, T. Y., Tan, T. H., & Chu, Y. L. (2010). QR code and augmented reality-supported mobile English learning system. In Mobile Multimedia Processing(pp. 37-52). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

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

QR Code and Augmented Reality-Supported Mobile English Learning System

Bransford, Stevens, Schwartz, Meltzoff, Pea, Roschelle, Vye, Kuhl, Bell, Barron, Reeves, and Sabelli (2006) indicate the trend of synergy for learning in the next phase of development. As of their insights, learning activities are not separate but interrelated with each other and finally synergize to establish a new learning era. Authors categorize learning activities into three formats, implicit learning, informal learning and formal learning.

Implicit learning is defined as receiving knowledge in an unconscious and effortless way. This sort of learning activities can be tracked in many settings and start early in people’s lives. Based on neuroscience findings, implicit learning draws our attention to “critical period” for learning and states that toddlers will overproduce the synapse and then prune as ages increase. When they are young, children are not thoroughly committed and can generate more than one “mental filter” that expands the learning ranges.

Informal learning provides us the practical context that we can be situated in for knowledge transfer and it was the most common learning context that we can face in everyday life. Formal learning normally refers to the education context of schooling or traditional instruction. Up to now, more emphasis is placed in the combination of those three learning strands. It is widely agreed that three learning strands synergies to improve peoples’ effective learning.

I do agree with the trend of synergy for learning and the idea of life-long learning. In fact, when I was young, I was instilled the idea that “never too old to learn” with a number of examples of celebrities but I cannot understand what it denotes. With the accumulation of knowledge, I consider life-long learning as an ideal condition for self-learning that will be based on the synergy of three strands of learning. To be a life-long learner, people should be intrinsically motivated and integrate various learning strands in the everyday learning context. It is impossible for learners to permanently stay in one context that means leaners will move among implicit learning, informal learning, and formal learning. Exposed to various contexts, learners are supposed to be situated in and also construct or solidify knowledge foundation according to their will. This also addresses the requirement of self-regulated learning to complete the synergy and knowledge transfer. Self-regulated learning not only accumulates a sum of knowledge but also requires learners to develop metacognition, motivate themselves intrinsically, and assess learning process on their own, which more focuses on learning abilities and motivation. Normally when learners are intrinsically motivated, they can develop that sort of lasting attachment to learning in a certain context. Then when they move to a new context, self-regulated learners can complete the transfer of knowledge and monitor how the process achieved their goals, which is quite beneficial since learning is a complex system situated ubiquitously in the everyday life.

Reference:

Bransford, J., Stevens, R., Schwartz, D., Meltzoff, A. N., Pea, R., Roschelle, J., Vye, N., Kuhl, P. K., Bell, P., Barron, B., Reeves, B., & Sabelli, N. (2006). Learning theories and education: Toward a decade of synergy. In P. Alexander & P. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed. ed., pp. 209-244). Mahwah, NJ: : Erlbaum.